I couldn't have wished for a better end-of-year lengthy discussion than my lengthy session with Chris this week. He's one of the brightest, curious and most committed young professionals I've ever had the privilege to work with. As we get set to bury the truly God-awful 2009 reconnecting with Chris is the best reinforcement that better days are ahead because ambitious emerging talent always leads to a better future.
During our discussion Chris talked about a particular department he had been working with that certainly had issues but he said was thankfully comprised of "many experienced people." He reeled off a rather extensive list of issues, but the headlines were:
1. The department didn't have a true manager;
2. Each of the department employees did things their own way;
3. 2009 was a disappointing year for the company, revenues were off and although they had made great progress, costs were still higher than they should be. As he assessed it, the biggest cause for higher costs was waste due to breakdowns in the order entry-to-production cycle;
4. The department was supported by tools that were decent enough and although they were constantly being upgraded not everyone in the department thought it necessary to use them;
5. The company and its industry was going through radical and perhaps even painful changes but not everyone in the department was sensitive enough to these changes to adopt new methods.
So here I am with a wonderfully gifted individual who represents the future, fascinated by his apparent celebration of the past--one that was no longer working--who valued experience.
Clearly,"experience" can mean a great deal of many positive things, but in an environment that is defined by change, I'm rather certain that captivity to experience --for the sake of it-- is a guaranteed losing strategy. Of course Chris, like all of us, must respect and honor proven experience yet I believe it is just as important to keep in mind that experience is not a synonym for expertise.
Given the five isolated problems (listed above), does this seem like an expert group?
Shortly after speaking with Chris I found the time to finally check out the 2010 NFL Pro Bowl rosters. The first thing I noticed was, although named an alternate, NY Jets' Left Tackle D'Brickashaw Ferguson didn't make the AFC roster. A classic case where voters confused experience with expertise because in his 4th year Ferguson played so expertly he deserved to earn Pro Bowl. But the selection that really leaped off the page was San Francisco 49er Tight End Vernon Davis earning the starting Pro Bowl spot for the NFC. That's the same Vernon Davis who wanted to do things his own way during the 2008-2009 season his coach, Mike Singletary, publicly blasted him, more than once. A year ago it sure looked like Vernon Davis was headed for the scrap heap of "uniquely gifted athletes never to be heard from again, destroyed by a lousy attitude."
Singletary, an NFL Hall of Fame player and a 10-time Pro Bowl selection himself cared enough about excellence, followed his convictions to push Vernon Davis, and one year after Davis was shocked by his head coach's tirades against him, undoubtedly was the catalyst for Vernon Davis becoming an NFL all star.
For Chris and his company and all others, I wish only the best things for you in 2010 and suggest it can be a wish-come-true by applying a bit of Mike Singletary's style of getting results to succeed in business climate more volatile, competitive and exhausting than the NFL.
Happy 2010 Everyone!
3 comments:
Hey Mike as always loved the post. How are things?
Abe Zeines
avrumy@gmail.com
J-E-T-S,,, Jets, Jets, Jets!
The Pro Bowl has always been not much more than a popularity contest. It is rare, if ever, that more than two players are chosen from the same team for the offensive line. Being a long suffering Jets fan, I agree with you that D'Brickashaw Ferguson should have been a Pro Bowl selection rather than a back up. His play over his first four years, and certainly during the last two years seen him elevated to All Star status. He is a very good player, but since he began playing next to Alan Faneca, a very experienced, twelve year veteran and perennial Pro Bowler, D'Brickashaw has certainly verified that the Jets made a good choice making him a first round selection four years ago. He is a very important part of what is arguably the best offensive line in Pro Football. I do have to wonder, though, would we be debating his status if he was not playing with a good mix of experienced and young players to form a solid squad working together to achieve superior results? Bye the way, the voters did not confuse experience with expertise in this case. The players selected at tackle have less NFL experience than D'Brickashaw.
I think that the Vernon Davis example is simply a demonstration of good management. Mike Singletary simply communicated with his talented tight end what he expected, probably why he expected it, and the ramifications if Davis did not fall into line. Do not confuse Davis' desire to do what he thought was right or best for the team as being rebellious or self centered or simply just doing what he wanted to rather than what was expected. Singletary did what any good manager needs to do on a regular basis. Set a plan, communicate that plan, implement the plan and take action when there is deviation from the plan. The manager also needs to look for feedback from his players to improve or alter the plan when it is not working. Simply throwing this experienced player on the scrap heap would not have solved anything.
I think that your com-padre Chris needs to think about why the issues he has are there. Has management seriously supported the department or just given it lip service until there is a disaster on the horizon, then come in puts out the fire and after it is out returns to the ivory tower. Does the department not have a true manager because of the person, it seems unlikely that suddenly this person has become unqualified? Is the person overwhelmed? Has this manager been put under unnecessary pressure due to unrealistic time lines, unreliable equipment, insufficient inventory, unqualified or untrained staff or a host of other day to day issues including poor lines of communication? Is this "untrue" manager unable to put a good structure, with qualified people, in place because of economic issues within the department or is it really misdirected company issues?. Has Chris communicated what is expected, why it is expected and assisted with the implementation and supported the manager's decisions and needs. Does the manager have a good mix of experienced people and young, potential pro bowlers? Do all of the players on the team know where they stand and what is expected of them? Does management make what appears to be empty promises that cuts can be restored without publishing a solid plan that everyone understands thereby demoralizing the team. And probably most important has Executive Management supported and worked with Chris to achieve the goals that are expected.
The issues that concern Chris are probably real. The ultimate question is how to resolve the issues, not just put band aids on them or put your head in sand and so you cannot see the real problems. It needs to make them go away and create a healthy, profitable department and company. I think that this company needs to look from the top down not from the bottom up, just like the Jets did.
Well said, Charlie.
This company needs to look from the top down.
Post a Comment