In my last post I mentioned that if you are a manager/leader that in order to be good at your job, or more importantly to be effective, the 50 hour work week is mandatory. It’s interesting that since that post I have been running into, and reading a lot, about how we should be cutting back our hours at work. I will also say I have gotten a lot grief over that comment. The standard quote is “Nobody ever looked back at their life and said I wish I had spent more time at the office.” Now don’t get me wrong that quote is definitely true, but let’s consider that there is a balance between going home to other responsibilities and interests, and making sure the job is done before we leave.

When I started my career in the mid 80’s fresh out of Virginia Tech, and then in the early 90’s fresh out of graduate school with an MBA, you had to work the 80-90 hour work week to be considered successful. If you were not working those kinds of hours you were not working enough, and part of the definition of success was whether or not you worked more hours than the other guy. I had always thought that was ridiculous. I discovered that those working in my company at the time that did the most bragging about the late hours they were working, spent most of the “daylight” hours lounging around chit chatting. I discovered that if I did not chit chat I accomplished more in 50 hours than they did in 80.

The mid 90’s began the age of not working more than 40 hours a week and that family and other interests were more important than your career. In the 70’s and 80’s and even before that career was everything. “From the Earth to the Moon” is an HBO mini-series on the race to the moon and how it was accomplished. One of the episodes concerns the engineers at Grumman sitting around waiting to hear if they got the contract for the Lunar Excursion Vehicle or LEM, later to be shortened to just LM for Lunar Module. When the call comes, Tom Kelly the chief engineer says to his crew, “Call your families and tell them that you will not be seeing them for awhile because we got the contract!” and a big cheer goes up. In today’s world it seems as if the attitude would be “great we got the contract but that does not mean I am going to work any harder.”

The attitudes towards work in this day and age have been reversed since the days of the Apollo moon landings. Now the attitude seems to be “I am going to work a set amount of time whether or not the job is done”, where it used to be “I am going to work more hours than need be to get the job done.” Both attitudes are ridiculous but the first is the most concerning. The ones working too many hours at least got the job done, but it seems as if the new generation is not so concerned with getting the job done as they are other interests in their lives. Other interests are fine but do not think for a minute that you can be an effective leader/manager if you leave before you work responsibilities are fulfilled.

Leaders/Managers, at least the good ones, know better. They understand that there is a balance. There is a home life and there is a work life. Without the work life you cannot afford the home life. And without the home life what’s the point of the work life. Leaders/managers understand that to be an effective leader/manager you have to be at work to support those under your supervision, and also to accomplish what you need to do during the day. There is just absolutely no way you can do that in a 40 hour week. If your followers are working 40 hours it will take you at least that amount of time to support them plus you still have to accomplish the work your supervisor asks you to complete. As a side note, you cannot check to make sure their work is complete until they complete it and go home.

Here is my point, if you are a leader/manager and you do not need to work more than 40 hours a week, and your followers are accomplishing everything you are asking them to, then you are not doing enough. You need to go to your supervisor and ask for more responsibility. Why? Because if everything is going smoothly and you are only working 40 hours then pretty soon your supervisors are going to start believing they do not need you. The other reason is that you can be doing more, and should be doing more. I do not mean go to the 80 hour work week, but 50 a week is not a big deal. You can still get in at 8 and leave at 6, or 7-5, and have quality family time, weekends off, and be an effective, indispensable manager. But if you are leaving at 40 hours whether or not the job is done because there are other things more important, then you need to find another job where you do not have supervisory responsibilities. It is extremely hard to set the example of getting the job done efficiently, if you are not getting the job done yourself. You will become the manager that does not do any work and leaves it for everyone else. You know who the manager is I am talking about; we have all worked for them.

The younger leaders/managers will never learn the work ethic if you do not teach it to them. If you do not show them and set the example they will always believe that it is about them and not the people in their charge. You have to teach them balance, not too many hours, work hard, work efficiently, get the job done, and go home, but don’t go home until it’s done.

We buy food, so we don’t have to grow it and it gives us time for other things.

We buy gas and cars so we can get to work quicker and have time for other things.

We even have jobs so we can work to make money so we can buy things to save us time.  If we sat at home all the time without a job, soon we would have to grow our own food, build our own house, cut down our own trees for heat, and then we really wouldn’t have time.  What?  You thought the settlers just sat around the porch all day and only hunted and farmed 8 hours a day?  Got news for you, they were up at dawn and in bed at sunset after having worked all day and most of the time 7 days a week.  They did not have the ability to buy food or pay for contractors or heat pumps.

The point is, time is everything, and if time is everything why do I want to sit in a 2 hour meeting at work that if organized correctly would only last 30 minutes?  Why do I want to listen to a seminar for 50 minutes when the speaker only says 5 minutes worth of material?  And more importantly if I am the leader/manager why would I make my followers listen to me talk for an hour when I only need 5 minutes?  And why would I make them sit in a 2 hour meeting that should only be 30 minutes?  One thing I cannot abide is somebody wasting my time by being late, or not organized enough to meet a deadline (which I guess is the same as being late).

If I cannot stand other’s lateness or missing a deadline, then I have to hold myself to that same standard.  As a manager, my weekly meetings with my staff only lasted 30 minutes.  If we ran 31 minutes we stopped and scheduled another time to get together and cover what we missed.  If it was an individual problem I would schedule time with that individual, but I would not hold up the entire group.  Most meetings are important, some are not, but 90% last too long.  If you are a manager or a leader get a grip on your meetings/time. Know what you want to cover ahead of schedule, have an agenda and follow that agenda.  If someone wants to add something else to the meeting, they need to schedule it ahead of time.

Sounds like it stifles creativity?  It does not.  There are meetings that can be held to brainstorm and if you have 3 hours or 3 days to do that, then schedule it.  But at the end of 3 hours or 3 days end it, and don’t extend it just because you scheduled 3 hours.  If you get done what you need done in 1 hour, end the meeting.  If you are on a 3 day retreat go home early.

Once your staff gets the message that you think their time is valuable then your meetings will be more productive.  You will have better attendance, better and more focused participation, and there will not be the gloom of the impending meeting hanging over everyone.  And you know what I am talking about. The weekly/monthly/quarterly meeting everyone hates to go to because it lasts too long, you don’t get anything out of it, the head of the department gets up to talk only because they enjoy hearing themselves talk, and they feed you either really bad food, or too much good food and you can’t stay awake for the afternoon sessions.  If done correctly the reason for meeting could have been accomplished by your second cup of coffee.  The reason for most of these all day meetings is so that everyone can see everyone regularly.  If that’s the case schedule a bowling tournament, or something interactive for all day somewhere. That way people can really get to know each other.  How do you get to know people while someone else is talking?

Remember your staff still has to do the work, that gets the product to the client, so you can get paid, and afford all those time saving items like food and shelter.  I have always been of the opinion that you go home when the work is done, not when the clock hits 8 hours, so if you have a meeting that lasts 3 hours that shoud have lasted 1, then your people have lost 2 hours worth of productivity and cannot go home on time or more importantly, I can’t go home on time.

I have a family too, and I would like to get home to them more than I would like to sit in a meeting.  I work in a professional position and understand that my job is at least 50 hours a week not 40 hours a week.  I understand that more is expected of me by my superiors and those who rely on me as their manager.  If you are a leader/manager in your company and you are not at work, or working 50 hours a week, odds are that you are not doing your job, but that is another post.  So if I am working 50 hours minimum a week, please don’t add to my already full workload with superfluous or meaningless tasks or meetings.  My goal is to accomplish my work, and make sure my staff accomplishes their work in the least amount of time so I, and they, can go home.  That should be yours too. 

Don’t waste my time and more importantly don’t waste other’s.  Time is something you cannot get back.

1. Develop expectations
2. Communicate Expectations
3. Verify Expectations are being met

An example is a division a friend of mine runs.  He is very good at developing ideas and halfway decent communicating what he wanted his people to do, though he came up with so many expectations his people began to pick which ones they wanted to follow because they could not accomplish everything.  There was never any verification that his people were doing what he wanted and he did not know he had so many expectations his employees had no way to live up to them all.  He did not know that his employees were picking which expectation to live up to.

He had several layers of managers under him and because the people he directly impacted were conflicted so were the other layers of management below them and so on and so on.  Everyone under him was following his example of not verifying accomplishments on a regular basis.  So what began to happen is that the clerks who entered invoices and paid bills, 3 levels of management down the line, were not doing it properly and because their managers were not verifying their work the mistakes began to pile up.  Until finally a  cash flow crisis reared its ugly head when year end reconciliations were run.

My friend had to end up retrenching the entire division and firing several layers of management, some of whom were blatantly stealing since no one was verifying the accuracy of their work.  The direction of the division went entirely in a direction he had not intended and all because he did not follow up on his employees to verify that the expectations he had communicated were being met on a regular basis.  If he had checked weekly or monthly or just even regularly he would not have had these issues.  He would have seen his managers were not doing all he asked, and he could have redirected them sooner.  I firmly believe that 95% of employees want to do what is expected of them, the other 5% need to go elsewhere, but employees cannot do what is expected of them if they do not know what that is.

The bottom line is that there are some leaders who can just by sheer force of will and providence be successsful “despite themselve”, but personally I don’t really see them as leaders but as visionaries.  If you are not developing, communicating, and verifying I really don’t consider you a leader, and that is not an insult (next blog topic).  The majority of us out there, when we are blessed with a leadership role, have to work hard to be successful leaders and we have to be intentional about it.  If we are not intentional about how we lead, then soon we will be unsuccessful leaders.

Future writings, “Why being a successful follower is more noble and harder than being a successful leader”,  “The best leaders are the ones in the middle, who have to follow and lead all at the same time.”

Never been a big fan of that person.  Am a big fan of the detail grunt.  You know, the one that is so particular about things being done, and being done correctly.  The detail grunt is the one with the patience of Job.  Guess what, neither one of those people, “big picture”,or “detail grunt” is a leader.  In order to be a leader, or at least an intentionally successful leader (probably need to write about what an intentionally successful leader is) you have to get your hands dirty.  You have to show your followers what you want done, how you want it done, and how you are going to evaluate their progress.

“But dude, sometimes I do not know how I want it done or how I want it evaluated, I leave that up to my team.”  If you look really closely at your team you will notice that there is one, maybe two people, usually just one, who does the “how” and the “eval”, that’s your leader.  The one who can take the big picture, understand it, and communicate it to others, thereby enabling them to “fill” the picture up with big things, that’s your leader, and the visionary may or may not be that person.

Visionaries can be leaders, and leaders can be visionaries, but just because you are a visionary does not mean you are a leader.  It works in reverse as well, just because you are a leader does not make you a visionary.  How many times have you seen the owner of the company, the one with the big ideas, come in and mess with the day to day routine and make everyone’s job harder, and impact results negatively.  I have seen it numerous times.  The problem is that the owner thinks they are a leader and they aren’t.  Their leaders have already implemented their dream and are making it happen.

If you are a visionary let your leaders work and accomplish your vision, but do not try and teach them to be leaders, you will not be successful and your dream will suffer.  You know what everyone needs?

1. A visionary.
2. A leader to make the vision happen.
3. A detail grunt

Put those three together and you have a “success”.  They can be one person or three but you gotta have all three.  None of which are more important than the other.

Next up “Intentionally successful leaders”

If all these resources are out there then why is “leadership” so bad?  Companies and individuals pride themselves on putting on, and attending leadership conferences, and seminars.  Obviously they do not need to be told to continuously educate themselves on how to be a leader.

You know what I think the problem is?  I think everyone wants to be a leader and that just can’t happen.  Ever hear the phrase “too many chiefs and not enough indians”.  Of course you have, we all have.  But it seems that it is demeaning to be considered an indian and not a chief.  But that is another post.

Here is all you need to know about being a good leader.  It is what I call the “Expect 3″.

1. Develop Expectations

2. Communicate Expectations

3. Verify that Expectations are being met. (Credit to Ronald Reagan, “Trust but verify”.)

Those three things is all a leader needs to do to be a successful leader.  Don’t get me wrong, you can be considered, and notice I said considered, a successful leader without doing all three, but you would be wrong.  You would be a lucky leader if you did not do all three and still saw good results.  Your followers need to know what their expectations are,  those expectations need to be communicated clearly, and you need to follow up on your followers to make sure they are meeting the expectations.

Nothing else is important to leadership.  Everything else will flow from “Expect 3″.  There are volumes written on how to develop goals. there are volumes written on communication, and there are volumes written on evaluation.  Go to those seminars, read those books, but if anyone wants you to go to a leadership seminar be clear about what they are really going to teach you.  More than likely they  will only focus on either the communication or development aspect of “Expect 3″.  Very few will cover follow up and evaluation in a leadership seminar. 

Try those three principles with your employees/followers and see if it works and if you are even plopped down in a leadership postion make sure you do those 3 things.

Next up.  Visionaries vs. Leaders, those who see the dream and those who make it happen.