Quantcast


Sep 03 2009

Creating Passionate Teams – Managers Hold the Spark

Category: career,executive learnings,teaming & leadershipjmacofearth @ 7:00 am

"More than anything else talented people want to be in environments that both appreciate
and cultivate their talents."
Scott Berkun

Collecting two key thoughts about teams and empowered project management. These two folks have changed my entire perspective on teams and management and passionate leadership. Even when we are not "managing" anyone, we are all project managing each other in our work. We manage up to get what we need from the executive leadership. And we cooperate across disciplines and business silos.

“What do you need from me in order to kick ass on this project?” — Kathy Siearra, Creating Passionate Users

From Scott Berkun: How to Manage Smart People …managers have many undocumented, unsaid,
but incredibly important, functions. They have more to do with enabling the happiness and productivity of the people that work for them than anyone else in the organization.

…he created an environment where good ideas rose to the top, further encouraging smart people to
want to contribute. The bossman made working for him feel like a proper relationship:
he got something from us, and we got something from him. I think that this kind of management
style requires more skill and savvy than a more hierarchical drill sergeant type of
manager.

More than anything else talented people want to be in environments that both appreciate
and cultivate their talents.
Any successful manager of talented people has to come in
every day, in every meeting, and directly work towards making this happen. This doesn’t
mean coddling people, or denying the team’s goals in favor of making someone feel
good. Instead it’s about making actions and decisions that both clarify how people’s
talents apply to the team goals, and working to keep the team happy, motivated, and
focused in that application.

One practical way to overcome this [lack openness] starts with a meeting. The manager sets up a meeting
with the employee and opens a discussion about how they like to be managed. The manager
should explain the purpose of the meeting, and asking clarifying questions about what
the other person says. Generally, the manager should say little about their own opinions.
Zero. Zilch. Zip. Instead, their job is to listen, help clarify the other persons thoughts
and then go away and think about what they said.

First acknowledge that you have weaknesses, both in skills and in knowledge. Second, admit that you’re ignorance hurts not only the product or website, but the team itself. Third, get help in hiring experts for roles you are not familiar with, and go out of your way to involve them, and their perspective, in
your decision making process. Deliberately hire first rate strong willed people to represent
disciplines that you tend to undervalue. Force yourself to be on the top of your own
game, and to make sure it’s not bias and ignorance that drive you, but good judgment
refined by divergent perspectives.

references
Kathy Sierra: BrainDeath by Micromanagement
Scott Berkun: How to Manage Smart People

@jmacofearth
permalink: http://bit.ly/team-leadership

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


May 28 2009

Internal Brand Confusion Study : Notebooks – Can Branding Actually Hurt Your Brand?

Category: about me,executive learnings,speed the web,tech opinionjmacofearth @ 10:42 am

Every executive of a major company should have the experience of going to their company's web site and making a purchase. It might be easy if you know exactly what you want. But when pricing, features, and even internal branding becomes confusing, imagine where the business will go.

Perhaps there are reasons for maintaining and building a lot of brands within a brand. I can think of some pretty good examples of how Nike has "owned" certain markets with their brands: Nike Golf; Michael Jordan's shoes and clothing line, even Nike Golf for Women.

But when the product is a commodity, like what kind of cheese to buy, or deciding between the house brand and the name brand? Sometimes BRAND can actually hurt your awareness.

I am working on developing this presentation to explore how complex branding and deep siloing of market segments or vertical markets can kill the purchase decision. A few of the questions I hope to explore:

  1. If we make it hard for the consumer to find what they want will they keep trying beyond a few frustrating minutes?
  2. Does Best Buy do a better job of laying out the choices?
  3. What are the differentiating features in various computer brands when faced with the wall of choices? Price, screen size, processor preference and ram/hd configs are king.
  4. If we make things confusing within our own brand, how will the customer decide when even more options (other manufacturers) are brought into the mix.
  5. What will we lose by simplifying the choices?

@jmacofearth
permalink: http://bit.ly/notebook-brands

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Feb 10 2009

Who's Afraid of Big Bad Google? – Still Lots of Room for Innovation

Category: executive learnings,tech opinion,trust & reputationjmacofearth @ 10:21 am

In the web space we often think of Google as the category killer. All of our marketing efforts are focused on Google, what Google does, how Google changes the algorithm and what the next Google Innovative App is going to be. But Google doesn't own the market on innovation, in fact they don't even "own" the market on search or social media. What Google owns is… [Let me get back to that in a second.]

As Twitter popped up out from under Google's watchful eye in 2006, Google tried to counter by buying Plurk and then shuttered it. [Plunk!] So how did such a game-changing app get built and launched without Google influence? And is Google worried about Twitter and Tweeterville?

And about that Google influence. Some of the smartest people on the web are at or from Google. My favorite aggregation site, FriendFeed was built by a bunch of ex-Googlers.

So what does Google OWN?

Google has 7_% of the search market. Google's AdWords and Paid Search Models are best-in-class and quite profitable. And Google is definitely an innovator.

But Google is also a behemoth that has begun to lose touch with much of the internet population.

I recently stumbled across a long thread on TechCrunch by exGooglers about why they left Google. And I will give some of the highlights here and let you read the LONG post if you are interested in more data.

Why Google Employees Quit – from techcrunch
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/18/why-google-employees-quit/

Those of us who failed to thrive at Google are faced with some pretty serious questions about ourselves. Just seeing that other people ran into the same issues is a huge relief. Google is supposed to be some kind of Nirvana, so if you can’t be happy there how will you ever be happy? It’s supposed to be the ultimate font of technical resources, so if you can’t be productive there how will you ever be productive?

The truth is that Google can be a really horrible place to work if you happen to run up against its shortcomings. Not liking it and/or not being successful there is not a good indicator of personal competence (and if you think about it you may realize that some Googlers are successful despite being incompetent, so it works the other way too.) With so much positive press about Google it is very difficult to put a negative experience there in perspective. This thread serves to balance the picture and gives us a, sometimes badly needed, lens through which to view our experience at Google and re-evaluate ourselves.

+++

I think that a big part of it is that Googlers are supposed to be totally “A” players who just always make things work out well. And there’s some truth to that: for each of us here with a bitter story to tell there are other people who landed in pretty much the exact same situation and ended up loving it (and a lot more who put up with it and kept their mouths shut). So, until it gets hard for Google to hire top talent, I don’t think the kind of complaints that have been raised here will become a priority at the Googleplex.

+++

Make it easier for people to switch managers if the fit is egregious. [my personal favorite innovative idea]

+++

Of course nothing stays the same but you when working with a team where politics, egos and bullshit didn’t
exist and suddenly it did, you can’t help but feel confused. You read so much about how amazing it is to work at Google and for the first two years it was. I was empowered, promoted, treated with respect and honesty. Before I left it was a place full of quiet moans, talented people being undermined and a structure that created hostility and politics.

+++

I mean, what do you expect? You’re 1 in 30,000 where most of your peers are either extremely smart or extremely competitive or both. Honestly, when the degree of compensation (bonus) is based on merit then you’re setting yourself up for disappointment unless you have an IQ of 300 or you’re willing to work until your eyes bleed.

Secondly, if you don’t work in engineering then forget about it. Google is a company run by engineers.

+++

There's a lot more in the post. It is an interesting read to understand some of the culture inside Google that does not match with the mythic nirvana-ish Google we imagine. As any company gets HUGE the structures change. And as the reorgs continue to come in waves, as management shifts new players in and then executes them when the company performance is not what they wanted, the culture becomes more fractured. How many times at one of my former jobs were people surprised that I was loving it and thriving at such a massive sweatshop-legendary company? And the phrase was always easy off my tongue, "It all depends on your manager." And boy did I learn the bitter truth of that.

A couple more exGoogle quotes for good measure.

I felt like my team spent so much time trying to figure what was coming down the pipe next, who was leaving next, etc that it wasted a lot of energy.

+++

My bitterness is almost entirely because of my manager. He was in my orientation group in Mt. View and seemed like a good egg at the time. Just as Google can be a great place for the software engineer to do great work unencumbered, it’s also possible for a manger to be a complete jerk unencumbered. Tho the other members of the group (that didn’t leave sooner) thought that they could put up with anything to work at Google they did notice my manager’s particular irrationality when dealing with me. There were only two days of my six months there that I didn’t dread going to work.

So in a company the size of Google your manager is your lifeline. If you are supported, given honest and accurate information, and work with a team that moves past the 5 dysfunctions, you might thrive. If your manager is looking out for their best interests over yours or your teammates, then you will have a harder time.

And if your manager's presentations to their manager does not contain direct references to YOUR success and YOUR projects and actually contain YOUR name, guess what? Your manager's manager will NEVER KNOW WHAT YOU DO. Thus you will be expendable and ineffective at driving projects. And if your managers boss will not even take a meeting with you, and her assistant responds like this, "Her schedule is booked for the next month." Let's just say, you've been marginalized. And they might as well use a contractor in Bangalore or Korea. And those Project Mangers will probably have equal success and equal value to the company. And those poor souls will probably be equally as expendable.

So what does Google have on everyone else?

They do have some of the smartest people in the business. They are devoting a good chunk of their resources to Innovation pure and simple. And they will continue to roll out successful products and not-successful products. But the Twitters of the world will keep coming. And Google and Microsoft and Adobe cannot buy them all.

Thank goodness for that.

@jmacofearth
permalink: http://bit.ly/exGooglers

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Jan 26 2009

5 Things to Never Tell Your Manager

Category: career,executive learnings,teaming & leadershipjmacofearth @ 7:01 am

[The term boss has always been distasteful to me. In this excerpt I changed boss to manager in the title. In a matrix-style organization it is much more about lines of command and spheres of influence. When people use "boss" to describe me I feel like I am outside or above the team. It is important to maintain objective leadership, but when it becomes "us" and "them" the collaboration has become one of duty and not of passion or trust.]

5 Things to Never Tell Your Manager

Though full disclosure and transparency are buzzwords today, that doesn't mean your boss wants to hear about everything going on in the office.

1. All about the technology — and nothing about the business.

2. There's only one solution.

3. Bad opinions about your colleagues.

4. There's no way.

5. A surprise.

Note: "Getting help early could help keep a small problem from turning into a disaster," he says.

[When the asking for help is seen as a weakness or a failure then the team will silo any problems and keep individual agendas that do not necessarily support the entire team. Lincioni's book on Silos is a fantastic example of this issue.]

This article excerpted courtesy of ComputerWorld. Pratt is a Computerworld contributing writer in Waltham, Mass. Contact her at marykpratt@verizon.net.

@jmacofearth
permalink: http://bit.ly/dont-tell

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,




social media innovation group

future posts

A Collaborative Space: WebEx, Go-To-Meeting, Skype, Basecamp (Teaming/Meeting Tools)
Twitter Problem: How do you find enough interesting people to follow? Then how do you keep up with them?
The Agile Mind: Construction, Evolution, Care, and Feeding Instructions for Mental Flexibility

Add to Technorati Favorites

Blogged Blog Directory

Austin Interactive Marketing Association

jmacofearth's socialmedia dashboard via AllTop

99, near perfect hubspot ranking