On Friday, CNBC’s Becky Quick reported that multibillionaire oracle and investor Warren Buffett did not have plans to invest in Facebook, which is set for an initial public stock offering later this month. Oh, it’s not because he doesn’t like Facebook, nor does he think the social media platform is a bunch of hype. In fact, he said he thinks that what’s happening at Facebook is “extraordinary”. “People get excited when a company does that well,” he said, “And they should.”

No – the reason he’s decided not to invest in Facebook, or similar companies is because, as he admits, he doesn’t understand the social media sector of technology. No dummy, he’d no doubt understand it perfectly well if he’d studied it, but he’s just chosen to become an expert in other kinds of businesses. And Warren Buffett didn’t become one of the wealthiest people in the world by investing in things he didn’t fully understand.

His comments echo those of former Fidelity Magellan Fund manager Peter Lynch, who wrote in his book Beating the Street that investors ought not put their money into anything they can’t explain with a crayon. Literally. We think that’s excellent advice.

The same holds true for the willingness of people to “invest” themselves in your organization. If people don’t understand what we’re all about well enough to be able to describe it with a crayon, literally – a crayon – then they can’t, and therefore won’t put themselves into their work with the kind of Commitment we need.

Here’s an assignment: Go out and get a box crayons. Then, in your next staff or team meeting, give everyone a plain sheet of white paper, and one of the wax implements, and ask them to portray, using only that crayon, what your organization (or team) is all about. Use the results as a springboard for a meaningful discussion about what your organization is, in fact, all about. If your team struggles a bit more than you’d like, or if you’re not particularly happy with what you see, strive to solidify that understanding of what you’re all about over a reasonable time, say, six months or so. Then come back and revisit the discussion with your team.

Richard Hadden is a leadership speaker, author, and consultant who helps organizations improve their business results by virtue of a focused, engaged, capably led workforce. He and Bill Catlette are the authors of the popular “Contented Cows” leadership book series, and Rebooting Leadership. Their newest book, Contented Cows STILL Give Better Milk, is due to be released by John Wiley & Sons on July 3, but is available for pre-sale now. Learn more about them and their work at ContentedCows.com.

A core part of every leader’s duty, regardless of rank, is having the wisdom and courage to sever the relationship with someone whose performance or behavior either persistently or grossly fails to meet expectations. It’s what we get paid to do. Failure on our part to either notice the condition or take decisive action represents a fraud against the person, their teammates, and the organization as a whole.

Such a fraud was committed yesterday when National Basketball Association commissioner David Stern opted to suspend rather than terminate the services of a player for a vicious, deliberate hit against an opponent. The player in this case is Ron Artest (aka Metta World Peace), who leveled Oklahoma City Thunder player James Harden in Sunday’s nationally televised game between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Thunder. No stranger to unacceptable, violent behavior (on court and off), Artest has reportedly been suspended twelve (yes, 12) previous times in his thirteen-year career as an NBA professional.

Two things are evident from this record: 1) Mr. Artest is an individual who no longer deserves to be called a professional, by virtue of his unwillingness to control his behavior, 2) Sending him to “time out” doesn’t do any good. Where are Donald Trump and his elevator when we need them?

The question, for us at least, isn’t what to do about the NBA’s latest thuggish behavior, but rather, what happens to the Ron Artests on your team? No, you probably don’t have anyone on the payroll who has committed multiple batteries, but what about those who can’t seem to control their bigotry or bully tendencies? How about those who are clearly incapable of playing nice with others, or perhaps those who Professor  Robert Sutton referred to so aptly in his book, The No Asshole Rule?.

If you’ve been in a leadership role for any reasonable length of time, you’ve likely faced at least one of these characters. But have you dealt, really dealt with them? Our experience suggests that in too many cases, managers duck the issue because it’s hard, because it can damage your popularity for a while, you don’t want the hassle of extra scrutiny and lengthy termination procedures imposed by the folks in HR, and besides, as short as job tenures are these days, you might get a hall pass and title of the problem will transfer to a new owner. When that happens, not unlike the current day NBA, both you and the organization will pay a high price in lost respect, credibility, and business outcomes.

Here are a few suggestions:

1. Deal with these situations sooner, not later. The passage of time with no intervention almost always makes the matter worse. The minute you decide that an employee needs to be on someone else’s payroll (preferably a competitor’s), start that process.
2. Not unlike any other surgical procedure, get a 2^nd and 3^rd opinion. Ask a fellow manager whose opinion and discretion you trust to dispassionately review the matter. Invite an HR professional to do the same. Trust us on this one. Most of them provide valuable advice, and they really do have your (and the organization’s) best interests at heart.
3. Be mindful of your own culpability. If you have in some way failed to be clear with the person about your expectations, or giving them a fair chance to succeed, own it and rectify it. Otherwise, step up to your duty.

“Avoiding the solution of a tough, miserable, volatile problem is not discretion. It is cowardice. And it is robbery. … Any coach who doesn’t kick the complacent ass on his team will end up kicking his own before long.”–Pat Riley, The Winner Within

*****

A pathfinder in the arena of leadership and employee engagement, Bill Catlette is a seminar leader, keynote speaker, and executive coach. He helps individuals and organizations improve business outcomes by having a focused, engaged, capably led workforce. He is co-author of the Contented Cows leadership book series, the next edition of which will be released in July 2012 by John Wiley & Sons. For more information about Bill, his partner Richard Hadden, and their work, please visit their website, or follow him on Twitter at http://twitter.com/ContentedCows

Recently, Indiana school bus driver Angel Perry was aboard her bus with 11 children when a slight (no, make that big) problem presented itself. The problem was an F4 tornado bearing down on them at close range. Resultant from Ms. Perry’s quick action, 11 school children avoided certain injury or death. Please take a moment to click the image below and watch the video before continuing.

Like Ms. Perry’s school children, we (U.S. citizens) find ourselves aboard our national bus with not one, but several immediate and equally dangerous crises presenting themselves – a fiscal crisis, a trust crisis, a skills and education crisis, an energy crisis, a confidence crisis, a health care crisis (yes), and perhaps most importantly, a leadership crisis. Many of our educational, commercial, and other civic organizations face their own comparable dangers. We could certainly take a lesson from Ms. Perry’s example. Let’s deal here with the leadership aspect.

Ms. Perry knew that somebody had to lead, and although the word, “leader” is probably not reflected in either her job description or pay grade, it was required of her on that day. Such is true for many of the rest of us, whether our official job title is congressman, CEO, supervisor, or janitor.

With but a moment to summon the courage and wisdom to guide her, Ms. Perry called on her God for assistance. Then, having calmed herself, she calmed those around her, “Shh… quiet.” We’re neither qualified nor in the business of providing spiritual advice, so let’s leave it at, when in the heat of battle, you need to go wherever you need to go in order to act in a calm and rational manner.

Ms. Perry shared the big picture with her young charges. “Tornado on the ground, guys… Look, the funnel cloud” while preparing them to act. “Shh… quiet.” Since none of us operate day to day, or moment-to-moment in the “big picture”, she also shared the immediate game plan, “”We’re going back to the school.” People desperately need that type of information in order to function responsibly. Without it, they’re basically just along for the ride. Yet, in an age when we have a wealth of communications tools and techniques at our disposal, it seems safe to say that we probably do a poorer job than ever of truly making meaning, which, in our view, is one of a leader’s foremost responsibilities.

Evidencing a leadership trait that is in such short supply these days, Ms. Perry demonstrated clearly and convincingly that she cared, really cared about her young charges, first by having them count off and then “checking off” each one as they exited the bus, and then later asking if they were okay. Interested in their safety, she had previously instructed them to shield their heads with a textbook. Whoda thunk it? (That was probably the only time in history when a school textbook was truly worth its retail price. Since our own books (http://contentedcows.com/books/)are often used as college texts, we’re pointing the finger at ourselves as well.) And unlike the captain of the Italian cruise ship, Costa Concordia, we’re willing to bet she was the last one off her ship, ‘er bus.

Angel Perry was, if nothing else, decisive. Knowing that her decision timeframe consisted not of weeks or months, but seconds, she demonstrated real bias for action. She also knew something that seems to regularly escape the rest of us – the fact that to make no decision is indeed a decision itself, and it is usually the wrong one. Kicking the can down the road, as so often happens in Congress, boardrooms, school board, and town hall meetings alike would have proven deadly.

Through her leadership, Ms. Perry kept that twisted and bent school bus from becoming a tomb. As we proceed from here, let’s all keep an image of a big yellow school bus seared into memory, as a reminder to emulate some of Ms. Perry’s actions, and a yardstick by which we measure the performance of others.

Ordinarily, we try to have a positive focus in this blog, encouraging leaders to adopt or maintain practices that will coax the very best effort from their teams. As opposed to the usual “start doing this” stance, this post is one of the “don’t do that” variety.

Earlier this week, a political shock jock who is as loved by some as he is loathed by others made completely uncalled for and by most measures, out of bounds comments about the morality of a young female college student. Days later, at the point of spears held by his show’s advertisers, he issued something of an apology.

Though it is entirely appropriate to personally and genuinely apologize when you’ve stepped in it, we sometimes lose sight of the fact that an apology doesn’t undo the wrong. Acts of contrition may serve as salve for a wound we’ve created, but make no mistake – there is still a wound there. Only in Hollywood does the wound get undone and those who created it or got themselves voted off the island get to come back at season’s end.

The lesson here for leaders is that we must be very mindful of the fact that once we open a can of worms, it’s open. We can no more put worms back in the can than we can put uttered words back in our mouth. There a number of faux pas that our teammates in the workplace simply aren’t going to forgive, let alone forget, apology or not. Chief among them are the following:

1. Lying – as in knowingly and deliberately misleading people
2. Taking credit for the accomplishments of others
3. Publicly reprimanding or embarrassing someone

In each case, we lose the benefit of the doubt both with the individual(s) involved and bystanders, and a good bit of their discretionary effort as well. Quite often, those losses are permanent. Don’t go there, please.

*****

A pathfinder in the arena of leadership and employee engagement, Bill Catlette is a seminar leader, keynote speaker, and executive coach. He helps individuals and organizations improve business outcomes by having a focused, engaged, capably led workforce. He is co-author of the newly released book,Rebooting Leadership. For more information about Bill, his partner Richard Hadden, and their work, please visit theirwebsite, or follow him on Twitter at http://twitter.com/ContentedCows

Managing employees is, in some ways, like parenting children. Every parent with more than one offspring has probably been fairly accused of playing favorites at one time or another. At home and at work, inadvertent or not, favoritism creates problems, and it’s something managers (and parents) would do well to be aware of, and guard against. Since this is a management and leadership site, and not a parenting one we’ll just talk about favoritism at work.

Bound in part by human nature (but not powerless against it), it’s relatively easy for a manager to step into the favoritism trap. Most of us, perhaps in response to the tough business climate, are running pretty lean, with little room for error. As a result, we rely heavily, maybe too heavily, on our stars. We give them the toughest, most important assignments, and most ridiculous deadlines. The most hours. The best schedules. More training. Cooler opportunities. And because they’re going above and beyond, maybe we grant them some privileges not afforded to all. We cut them a little more slack, and overlook the odd transgression that would surely be pointed out with lesser performers.

The average and poorer performers see this and cry favoritism, while the workhorse wonders, “Why am I the one carrying all the water?” Come to think of it, this is sounding more like parenting all the time.

If we’re really honest, we might admit that we just like some people better than we do others, for reasons not remotely related to job performance, and that we let that preference bleed through, even though we know that’s a lousy way to lead a group. Once we’ve gained control over that tendency, we’re left with the problem of favoring some over others for what we’d like to think are legitimate, performance-based reasons.

So what’s the difference, you might ask, between favoritism and performance management?  Isn’t it only fair to reward based on results? And, doesn’t it make sense to use your best players for the toughest plays?

Well, yes, but there are better ways to reward the strong performers on your team, and strengthen the others, than playing the favorites game.

Favoritism almost always produces unwanted results. It rarely motivates the lackluster towards stardom, and can breed a sense of entitlement in the favored. And you can bet that, in a doomed attempt to prevent it, some bureaucrat or lawyer will devise a scheme of rules, the imposition of which will serve only to tie your hands, kill creativity, and squash good tries by the best on your team.

It forms the basis for too many labor grievances, and a protracted pattern of favoritism helps cultivate an interested audience for union organizers. In short, it’s a practice we want to avoid with the same fervor and determination as we do those difficult conversations about declining performance, hygeine, and the questionable wisdom of dating a direct report.

Here are some better alternatives to playing favorites.

1. If someone’s not performing up to snuff, show some leadership, actively manage their performance, and don’t take the passive-aggressive route of ignoring them, mistreating them, and hoping they’ll get the hint and take a hike. Poorer performers deserve to be coached, and given the opportunity to improve, not left out in the cold, to figure it out themselves (amid shouts of favoritism).
2. Establish clear standards for performance, and then be unambiguous in communicating those standards. Leave no doubt as to what behavior leads to which results. Clearly articulate the steps that lead to where they’d like to go. You wanna make more money? Work a better schedule? Do more of the fun stuff? Here’s what it takes. How can I help you?
3. Build a culture of excellence, by making a clear connection between performance and rewards of all types. Above all, be consistent in providing a platform for visibility, and the opportunity to excel, but distinguish those who do their best work from those who are mailing it in. That’s anything but favoritism.
4. Just as it can be difficult to see the spinach stuck to our front teeth without a mirror or a caring observer, favoritism is usually hard to self-recognize. Ask about it on your employee survey. (You are doing surveys, aren’t you? If not, we can help.) Or, give your peers permission to tell you when they see it. When you become aware that there’s a perception of favoritism on your part, seek to understand why. If you’re convinced it’s not really favoritism, make the case. Otherwise, make a change. In you.

There’s a big difference between rewarding the best, and playing favorites. Build a culture of excellence, and soon you’ll be leading a whole field full of stars, and that will be the favorite part of your job.

****

Richard Hadden is a leadership speaker, author, and consultant who helps organizations improve their business results by virtue of a focused, engaged, capably led workforce. He and business partner, Bill Catlette are the authors of the acclaimed business classic Contented Cows Give Better Milk, and Contented Cows MOOve Faster, and the new book Rebooting Leadership. Learn more about them and their work at ContentedCows.com.