Horizon Point Consulting

Author: Mary Ila Ward

  • Don’t Network, Develop Your Social Capital

    Don’t Network, Develop Your Social Capital

    I find that the trouble most people have with “networking” boils down to two things:

    1. It scares the-you-know what out of them.

      Someone recently came to me seeking advice on how to advance his career. This happens a lot, but his response was interesting.  I told him to start networking. He responded that under no uncertain circumstances was he going to do that because it just wasn’t his personality.  He went on to say that if he had to be someone he is not to get ahead, then he shouldn’t do it. He wasn’t going to try to kiss you-know-what to get ahead.  I think manipulative, political behavior and networking were somehow synonyms to him; it seemed like it was some moral issue for him the way he presented it.  In other words all that he was saying was, networking scares the-you-know what out of me, so I’m not going to do it.

    2. The second reason stems from the first and is also seen in this example.  It’s quite frankly that people see networking as something it is not.  It is not about kissing up to someone, being entirely self-centered, or coming across as a used car salesman.

     

    So let’s get rid of the word networking.

    Now I tell people to develop their social capital.   What is social capital you say?  Google it and this is what you get:

    “Social capital refers to the collective value of all “social networks” [who people know] and the inclinations that arise from these networks to do things for each other [“norms of reciprocity”].”

    So social capital is whom you know and whom they know, and the inclination of those who know each to do things for each other.

    It’s not a one-sided thing; it’s a win-win thing, and unlike “human capital” that we talk a lot about and is related to what one person brings to the table, it is not what you know as an individual, but whom you know and what they know (or whom they know) that makes the difference. John Donne told us this quite a while ago before social media was even around, “No Man is an Island.”

    From a job search and hiring perspective, it indicates that what some people refer to as the “good ole boy network” is still much needed to get a job and advance- let’s hope with a lot more diversity to it these days- but it also, and maybe more importantly, relates to how good you can be at your job. You can’t know it all.

    Social capital gives us all a competitive advantage. How are you building your social capital to create win-wins?

  • Hitting the Gym Can Benefit Your Career!

    Hitting the Gym Can Benefit Your Career!

    I was in the gym the other day, trying to mind my own business while doing sit-ups (well attempting to do them), when I overheard a conversation between a personal trainer and the trainee. It went something like this:

    Trainee:  “Has your husband found a job yet?”…as she pulls on some ropes doing some exercise that made no sense.

    Trainer:  “No, he’s still looking.”

    Trainee: “What is it that he does?”  She stops her workout.

    The trainer said something about some obscure field of physics that made no sense to me.   (There is a theme developing here….)

    Trainee: “Really? We have a need for people with those skills and training where I work.”   (Who knew anyone needed someone in this field??)  “Can you get him to send me his resume?”

    Trainer:  “Sure! That would be great.”

    This eavesdropping led me to some insights on networking and  job searches that I think are pretty valuable. Everywhere you go, there is someone who might have a job or know about a job you are looking for. If you aren’t looking for a job, everywhere you go there are people that one day may connect you to an awesome opportunity. In addition, everywhere your spouse, kids, parents, best friend, etc. goes, there is someone there who might know about a job or an awesome opportunity.

    To capitalize on this:

    1. Go places. The gym is a good place to start.
    2. Talk to people in those places about life and work. See where your conversation leads you that might result in some mutual gains.
    3. Get your spouse, kids, parents, best friend, etc. to go places. The gym may be a good place to start for them too.
    4. Make all of these people close to you aware of what you want out of your career.
    5. Get them talking about opportunities and mutual gain.

    We make networking harder than it really needs to be.  It isn’t some speed dating game, it is simply:

    1. Going places.
    2. Talking
    3. Identifying mutual gain.
    4. Acting on those areas of opportunities.

    Now go get a workout in- our better yet, send your spouse to the gym. It might lead to some great results….in more ways than one.

  • GREAT REALITIES OF MANAGEMENT: It’s Not Your Fault, But It’s Your Problem…

    GREAT REALITIES OF MANAGEMENT: It’s Not Your Fault, But It’s Your Problem…

    By Kris Dunn

    It’s one of the unwritten rules of management. It’s also one of the hardest things for new managers to wrap their heads around.

    “It’s not your fault, but it’s your problem.”

    Let’s deconstruct that a bit.  New managers were often very high performing individual contributors (ICs). The great thing about being an IC is that you only have to worry about one person – and that person is you.

    But your performance as an IC convinced us that you’d make a good manager of people. For the most part that’s true.

    One point that sneaks up on new managers is taking feedback on what needs to happen related to their team as failure on the part of themselves (the new manager).

    Here’s what I mean – If you’re managing other managers of people and some of those are first time managers, you’re going to spend more time talking about what’s going on within those teams than you will with a more experienced manager of people. You have to be the coach for the new manager.

    As you’re coaching that new manager of people, it’s important to separate their individual identity as a high performer from the brand new – and at times, scary – role as a manager of people.

    Example – someone on their team is struggling in a certain area, and the new manager delays a bit. Your job is to push as the director, but careful! Your feedback might be perceived as failure on the part of the new manager.

    I’ve always found the best way to handle that with new managers is to use the title of this post –“It’s not your fault, but it’s your problem.”  

    What I’m trying to convey with that is simple – “Look, you’re going to manage people who struggle in your life as a manager.  Just because they’re struggling doesn’t mean you’re a bad manager. It’s what happens next that is key – are you gong to address it, coach for improvement, etc. Or are you looking the other way?”

    The only way you lose is if you don’t get in there and address it. Bias for action is the key for new managers.  Left to their own devices, most will wait too long to address whatever performance issue is in question.

    “It’s not your fault, but it’s your problem.” by Kris Dunn first appeared on November 30, 2015 at HR Capitalist

  • Measuring Leadership in the Classroom

    Measuring Leadership in the Classroom

    By guest blogger: Scott Mayo

     

    Schools love to measure things. With accountability being the buzzword in educational circles, measurement has become an even greater priority. However, we often fall trap to measuring things that are easy to measure, not because they are the most important things. Leadership is one of those important things – we all want it – that has been notoriously hard to quantify. How do I know that I have a teacher who is a leader?

    Kris Dunn, HR professional and blogger, has suggested we consider the ideas of Leadership Gravity and Leadership Birth Rate to judge leadership results. Leadership Gravity describes the phenomenon of a manager whose department consistently generates the most internal transfer in requests. Simply put, leaders attract people who want to be part of what they are doing. Likewise, Leadership Birth Rate looks at the number of people influenced by that manager who go on to become leaders themselves in the future.

    How would those concepts play out in a school setting? Are those appropriate categories of thought for measuring leadership among teachers? Leadership Gravity wouldn’t be the same thing as saying which teachers are the most popular or have the most students requesting their elective.  But leadership in education isn’t a popularity contest. However, if students did flock to a teacher while also providing feedback of  “challenging” and “rigorous,” it might be a sign of classroom-based Leadership Gravity.

    Likewise, if students come into contact with a leader in the classroom in such a way as to make a lasting impact (e.g. major choice in college, career path), that could illustrate the concept of Leadership Birth Rate in an educational setting. In schools, some feedback on progress comes at every test and every report card. However, much of what schools do doesn’t come to fruition until years down the road.

    The long-term impact on leadership development in the students may be one of those harder-to-measure things. It is easy enough to track who steps up for student leadership roles (e.g. class and club officers) during the students’ tenures at the school. To neglect to take a longer view, though, might miss the impact faculty are having as they attract students to their disciplines and guide their life choices into adulthood.

    Maybe we need to take a more longitudinal approach to measuring leadership in education by measuring student success at various intervals post graduation. Longitudinal studies have been done to show the value of Pre-K . Could it be done to show the value of various other facets of education including teacher leadership?

    What can educators and private business learn from each other to develop more leaders in the classroom and in business?

  • Should we measure leadership by popularity?

    Should we measure leadership by popularity?

    “The culture of any organization is shaped by the worst behavior the leader is willing to tolerate.”

    What departments and/or managers do people in your company clamor to get into?  What drives this clamor? I’ve seen it before. No one wants to work in finance, but everyone wants to be in marketing. Or everyone is trying to figure out a way to work for manager A instead of having to report to manager B. What is driving the popularity of the department or the person, and should we pay attention to it?  Is the number of people who want to work for you a good way to measure your leadership strength?

    Kris Dunn calls it “Leadership Gravity” in his Workforce Article. But I think we need to get to the root of what causes the gravitational pull before we bank on it as a way to measure leadership success.

    Some recent coaching examples I’ve encountered may give us some insight on the pull….

    1. Leaders that are everyone’s best friend
    2. Leaders that hold people accountable for results and because they are held accountable, they grow. This is what Kris is talking about when he says,

    “All that interaction and observation means your employees know which managers in your organization are the best at developing talent, giving them interesting things to work on, challenging them, giving them the credit for great work and always approaching employee development with an eye on what’s best for each employee.”

    I’ve had a couple of clients who have brought us in to say, hey, we think something is up with John/Jane Doe’s performance as a leader. We need a 360o evaluation of them. Can you do one and then let us know what’s up?

    Sure we can.

    In completely unrelated instances, the “perception” of the leader in question is he/she being the guy/gal no one wants to work for. He/she is usually compared to a counterpart middle level leader in his/her area. The counterpart seems to be best buds with his/her direct reports- i.e., the popular one.

    We do the 360o. And we look at it by those that report to this person and those that don’t.   In both instances, the people who report to the boss in question don’t say he/she is the jerk. They cite he/she as being focused on accountability, and, surprisingly, they don’t complain about it. They may say something about wishing he/she was a little “warmer” as a person.  A little less closed off, but not a jerk.

    In contrast, those who are looking from the outside, i.e.-those that don’t report to this manager, and sometimes it is his/her own boss-  cite he/she as being the jerk.

    Maybe the manager in question needs to improve his/her interpersonal skills by lightening up a bit, seeing the personal side of things. We can coach on that. But, at the end of the day, they challenge people to get stuff done and hold them accountable for it, and the people who are held accountable don’t mind it. They grow. Maybe they just want the boss to ask about how their day has been a little more, but they are better because of their leader.

    So maybe the better question about how to measure leadership is not by popularity but by measuring what DRIVES that popularity.

    Is it because he/she is best friends with people and lets them coast or is it because he/she creates a vision and drives people towards that vision and holds them accountable for it?

    If I were the boss’ boss, I’d choose the latter. That one is making more leaders, and 9 times out of 10 those who are following, aren’t complaining about it. And the ones who are complaining, you may not want around anyway.

    What popularity contests do you see in your workplace?