It is hard to capture the impact that someone has had on an organization or society for 16+ years, without being poetic or glowing or both. There have been some great articles written about Jon Stewart and Leadership like here and here. The authors have done well in capturing how Jon did it … i.e. demonstrating leadership … but they don’t tell us why. Why did Jon Stewart do what he did? Why did he exhibit traits of a “servant leader“, hire & promote talented people, thank his entire staff, yet become embarrassed being thanked by Stephen Colbert, during his last show?
I think it’s because he understands “Meaning” – connecting what he does, with a purpose. Let’s not overthink this, as it might render Meaning meaningless. So here is a simple way to understand this concept. It isn’t my idea, rather it’s his idea, which I like. Let me paraphrase a story he often shares…
At the 2006 World Economic Forum in Davos, a business leader asked why a “mystic” was at that meeting. After all, aren’t mysticism and philosophy unrelated and especially irrelevant, to business? The response was interesting. The business leader’s company made computers. So they talked about the purpose of making computers. Well, the purpose would be to make money by building useful machines for users, right? But let’s dig deeper; much deeper. Computers let people be creative, innovative, nimble and successful. If the outcome of making computers is that artists can express themselves inventively, bankers can move capital around the world quickly, and entrepreneurs can run businesses successfully, then isn’t the core purpose … the reason … for making computers be to ensure the well-being of people who use them? Isn’t this what a mystic, a yogi or a guru wants? The computer maker and the mystic both have the same purpose and so that’s why a mystic was attending a business meeting in Davos.
We must understand this deep concept of Meaning. It is positive, but not sappy and definitely not altruistic. When we ask why and answer by saying “To ensure the well-being of people we serve, people we work with and people we lead”, we then will enjoy meaningful lives at work and outside of it. We will build products that are harmless to the planet, we will pay people fairly, and lead people with conviction.
But we mostly find the exact opposite in practice. We are well acquainted when Meaning is absent from our lives, and when we don’t think about business this deeply. If we define Meaning only as profit, then paradoxically it is bad for business. Clearly, people are not satisfied with just profit. People don’t just want more profit, but want all of it. We then end up doing cruel things to each other like paying women 73c on the dollar v. men and firing people for who they love. These actions make work meaningless. In the US, it takes the form of only 31.9 % of people being engaged at work, because their leaders are disengaged as well. Gallup says people leaders account for at least 70% of the variance in employee engagement scores, and we fail 82% of the time to choose people who are capable of leading others. If we have disengaged people and leaders at work, then we know it reduces productivity and our ability to innovate and execute. Traditional training hasn’t fixed this issue.
So, making ourselves think about the well-being of other people drives the good things up (engagement, innovation and profit) and the bad things down (attrition, stagnation and cost). Meaning sustains organizations, because it sustains the people who work in it. So if the “product” of a profitable show like The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, is to give people the ability to think for themselves – for the sake of their well-being – then while you may not remember Jon Stewart’s antics 10 years from now, you will remember how it changed how you think. That kind of impact is sustainable and long-lasting for both Comedy Central and for Jon Stewart (profits from syndicated re-runs). That is not just being poetic or glowing. That is good business.
Image source: http://www.jeffbullas.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Why-Should-You-Spend-Money-On-Facebook-Advertising.jpg
Why do you think staffing agencies are not finding much success with off-shore sourcing teams?
It is neither the time difference nor the perceived language barrier (there are more English speakers in India than the US) that hinders your success in using off-shore resources. It is the fact that we do not celebrate sourcing as the most important task in the staffing process flow.
I believe that the size of one’s staffing database, is irrelevant. A good recruiter can staff up any opportunity, if she has the aptitude and tenacity to know what and where to look. I am sure you also have numerous examples of your own recruiting success because your sourcing strategy was better than the internal and external competition’s. Sourcing is everything that stands in your way of putting the right person on project and generating billing dollars.
My two step recommendati0n to underscore the importance of sourcing for you is to:
Accept that sourcing is the most important task in the staffing workflow
Find tenacious people and train and retrain them in sourcing strategies
Recruiting success begins with your acknowledgment that sourcing is the most important task in the staffing workflow. Make no mistake, it is absolutely the most important task in the staffing workflow. Sourcing is what separates the wheat from the chaff. Good sourcing relies on an individual’s tenacity and aptitude, which are excellent skills for any person to possess. Such an individual is also a hard-worker with a focus on results. So finding someone that can demonstrate good sourcing skills, will help you find top notch recruiters, even if you are hiring from outside our industry.
Acceptance of “the sourcing mantra” starts with:
Acknowleding that sourcing is an “intelligence function”, not grunt work
Spending more time and effort on identifying the right sourcers
Setting and rewarding a good source-to-deal ratio (example – 20:1)
- Prefering sourcers with a Master’s degree and some staffing experience
- Reviewing every resume submitted to your recruiters
- Meeting weekly to discuss performance issues
I believe that staffing success begins with both the acceptance of the importance of sourcing and being dedicated to (re)training sourcers regularly. Sourcing is not grunt work, even if it feels like the heavy lifting you don’t want to do. While it sounds great if you or your team came to work in the morning and had a nice list of 10 people per requisition to call on, it is a simplistic view that dilutes the importance of having the correct 10 candidates on that list.
Staffing companies pride themselves in their “database”.
Ask ANY sales person that works in the industry and it will most definitely be one of the main selling points that they will make to you. They will shill for their vast database of resumes (1m, or 5m or whatever) giving you the impression that they know so many people that they can find you any skill set for any project or need that you have. Period.
I take a different approach.
I believe that owing a large database is highly overrated. When I started in this business, it was with a startup with barely any database. In fact, the founders has a set of 5,000 some names, none of which were ever used in my knowledge, at least by me. That company then went on to becoming one of the 500 fastest growing private companies in America in 2008, as ranked by Inc Magazine. So I came to the conclusion that owning a large database, or any database is highly overrated. There is one exception to this statement – a database is highly relevant in niche skill sets. At the same company, I have seen this in play. My constertation is with a generic across-the-board staffing agency sales person pounding the desk claiming to have a large database that includes tons of resumes across tons of skill sets.
It is never the database but the data mining tools and data mining strategies that are much more important. Oracle probably recognizes this through its various acquisitions. The database company is now almost ubiquitous in many other unrelated areas of software development and delivery. The art of mining for candidates is the true differentiator between one agency and another. More specifically, the abilities of individual recruiters and their tenacity in finding the right person for the open job outranks a database, in my humble opinion, by a million times to one.
Update: Added link to founder of the Summit’s website.
According to a video posted by Barry Posner, Professor of Leadership at the Leavey School of Business, Santa Clara University, for the Leadership Summit, everyone is a contributor whether they know or not. Video available at: Leadership and Influence Summit, hosted by Daniel Decker. Keeping that in mind, I embarked on a brief thought experiment.
I spent a few days thinking about the one thing I brought to the table at work. I realized that it is neither my communication ability nor job motivation or interpersonal skills. It was Urgency. I call this the STOP – Supreme Trait Of Performance. On a Value/Performance chart, this trait is in the first quadrant.
For me, making a decision now or getting things done immediately outranks ever other task. My Urgency STOP has enabled me to become comfortable with ambiguity and to multi-task. If there was a top 10 list of people with a sense of Urgency, then I would numero uno.
This led me to consider the STOP for the individuals on my team. I wanted to identify the one Trait that each brought to the table. That same Trait powered their reason for professional existence as well performance. Some STOPs that emerged were Detection, Clarity and Repetition.
Detection: a detail oriented individual that covers every base imaginable while processing a transaction.
Clarity: a non-communicative person that works out solutions internally and understands the end goal well.
Repetition: a task oriented person that bangs away at a problem through sheer amount of work.
You may recognize these STOPs as either your own or as in someone you know at work. I realized that if you took everything else away from them, then they would still bring that Trait to work. It is part of their personality. I am quick to jump to conclusions or decisions, which may not always be a good idea. My Urgency STOP rules my head and heart, and if you took everything else I know or my other traits, then I will still continue to retain this one.
Communicating with people of different STOPs is complicated. When someone gives me a task, I am already executing on it in my mind and cannot wait to get to it. A Clarity STOP person may not know how to solve the problem right away, but they would be very clear about the end goal but just won’t tell you that.
As I continue building this construct, I would love to hear from your individual experience as you experiment with it.
When I rebranded by blog many months ago, I did not realize that I was infact trending towards Tim Sander’s POV. The New Global We I now believe, is an expression of what connects us, all the way from India, China, to Uruguay, France and the United States.
I believed for so long that only the cut-throat survive, and that not being one of them blows. What compounded that thought was the fact that I am not one of them and never will be. Hailing from a country like India where brawn still many-a-times overrules the brain, I figured that my game was over.
Then I read Love is the killer app. Ah, the power of books, and especially the ones recommended by people you admire and love. The concept is not new, but the description is refreshing. You always knew the subject, but you did not know how to implement it and Tim tells you what to do.
There are days where I absolutely *hate* someone, and there are the months where I carry over such hatred. While it is certainly satisfying, to be seething under the surface about this-or-that wrong, it is pointless. If this was 1000 A.D, it would be worthwhile because I’d walk over and mete out justice the old fashioned way. Obviously that is not going to turn out well for me. I’m not a powerful overlord that can kill a cut-throat’s career with one bad recommendation (really, who can do that these days?) or voodoo their good luck away.
What I can do, is love them. The New Global We is as much collective love as collective consciousness. It is also pointless if we’re connected through global networks with people, if we don’t like or love them. What collective love can do for misfits like me, is carve a path through the world of business and life. The worst that can happen to me is you rejecting my love and friendship, which is OK by me.
In business, the word love is cliched and “inappropriate”. You’re not supposed to love your colleagues, vendors, clients or boss(es)! This myth is spread by the cut-throats that are threatened by a loving person’s meteoric rise in stature and importance. Cut-throats also know they can’t influence bizlovers through their usual strategies. They believe lovers are weak and they are probably right under certain circumstances. Lovers also tend to give others more chances, more opportunities to try again. Lovers will listen to your sob stories for much longer, even if it includes some grapevine material inserted on purpose. At that very point in time, the cut-throats will be laughing their way to the bank when the lover is listening to you and not making money for himself/herself.
Love as a killer app works for me because cut-throats and lovers are all terminal and cannot take anything with them when checking out. Being terminal is the Great Leveler of humanity. When you think like that, the hate you feel after every argument or against someone that has wronged you, just evaporates. Really, what else can you do? I choose to be a lover and I am glad I am not a cut-throat. The only response I have to cut-throats these days in any case, is love.
Hate doesn’t give you solutions. There is one simple take away from Tim’s book. If you forgot everything else you read in it, then this is it – replace the word “hate” with “love”. For example: “I hate it when my computer slows down” or “I hate it when clients ask for one thing and then change their mind”. Rephrase it like so: “I’d love it if my computer worked faster” or “I’d love it if they figured out what they want and then asked for it”.
The word “hate” ends conversation and “love” (re)starts it.
Ever heard the statement “I would never ask you to do something I cannot do myself.” Maybe you’ve said it yourself, as I have.
I now disagree with it.
There is no shame in admitting that you can’t do something and need someone else to do it for you. That is why you hire or get hired in the first place. If I am able to do your work, then you are redundant.
People think that statement makes it fair to you. Wrong. Instead, they should say “I am asking you because I cannot do it” so that you know that a lot is riding on you getting it right.
Next time someone says that to you, tell them “That is okay. I want to do something you cannot.”
A great presentation shared on SlideShare, my personal favorite!
While not all of us can become founders, owners, entrepreneurs (someone has to do the nitty-gritty work!), there is definite power in scaling up!
This presentation shows founders, owners and entrepreneurs on how they need to better manage their people: Please open up your minds. Stop boxing in innovation and cutting-edge ideas.
Think in short, small sentences and increments. It helps!