Could one of the traits of a good leader be erasing and ignoring stereotypes?

Not trying to espouse and pose a rhetorical question, but exploring the question.

Can a good leader erase clichés from his or her thought process and instead turn to assessment, listening, understanding, experiencing and learning instead?

Here are some:

• Men are better executives.
• Men are more aggressive salespeople
• Immigrants do not do as well because they do not have local experience.
• People who work from home are lazing.
• ‘Command & Control’ gets better results than caring and accommodating.

The point is that these might be true for some people some of the time, but blanket statement and generalities are just that. A good leader listens and understands and draws conclusions based on information – not general and vague assumptions.

And there goes one cliché that needs to bite the dust: being cooperative and helpful detracts from the ‘executiveness’ of a person!

I recently read and reviewed Love ‘Em Or Lose ‘Em: Getting Good People To Stay by Beverly Kaye and Sharon Jordan-Evans. The book was a comprehensive digest of progressive management of people.

A review of the book is here: http://www.alighaemi.com/wp/?p=860.

I had the occasion to speak to Beverly Kaye about the contents of the book and bring you her answers and thoughts on topics covered by the book.

Bev, if you do not mind let me play the devil’s advocate for my first question. Is the concept of the book anachronistic given the tough times and the high unemployment rate?

Absolutely not!  The issue of engagement and retention is just as important in tough times as it is in good times.  The truth is that talented employees have choices, they can find other opportunities. Organizations or managers who feel they can relax because people aren’t going anywhere… or there’s plenty of talent out there… they will find themselves in hot water – if not already – soon.

When speaking with employees, or people in general, they seem to give more emphasis and credence to pay and salary than much of the research, including yours, implies. Am I speaking to a non-representative sample?

Many employees will use “better opportunity” or “higher salary” as reasons they leave, at least that’s what they write on their exit interviews.  But, if you take the time to follow them to their next job you will find that their reasons are often much more specific and many of those reasons have to do with their own manager.  Not feeling valued, appreciated, challenged, even noticed comes out higher on the list every time.  Not saying that pay is not a reason, or not important. It is, but if it is competitive and an individual is being challenged and talents are used appropriately then it will not be a factor in whether one stays or leaves.

The biggest criticism one could accord the book would be that much of its advice is beyond the power or reach of front-line managers. Love ‘Em Or Lose ‘Em insists managers are the most influential factor in whether employees stay. Could you reconcile these two notions?

I still believe that much of the power rests with the manager and that it is the relationship with the manager that is one of the most important factors in engagement and retention.  When we wrote Love ‘Em… we worked hard to make sure that most of the ideas were low cost or no cost, so I’d challenge you to find that the tilt is in the other direction.  Again, it takes a creative manager, willing to think outside the box, to take any idea we mention and tweak it so that it applies to his direct reports as individuals.  This means you need to know them first!

In your opinion, are modern managers getting better at leading their employees or are old-school habits persisting? Do you have any view or research in this regard?

I think the main old-school habit that seems to persist has more to do with the development discussion than the engagement conversation with a manager.  Managers have an erroneous belief that all of their people have a desire to move up in the organization and if those upward spots are not available they avoid that particular conversation instead of staying open and getting to know the career aspirations of their employees.  Career development and opportunities to learn and grow continue to be one of the major drivers for engagement and retention.

On the flip side, what would you reckon is the employees’ responsibility in regards to making their jobs and days pleasurable and successful?

When managers around the globe thanked us for the ideas in Love ‘Em  – not rocket science, but ideas that are easy to forget – and asked us my co-author and I wrote a companion book to Love ‘Em, what about employees (they asked)? Don’t they have a role in this? Shouldn’t they be responsible for their own job satisfaction?  The answer is ‘of course they do.’  We took the same 26 strategies and re-wrote the book from the employee’s perspective!  It’s titled Love It Don’t Leave It: 26 Ways To Get What You Want At Work. It makes a strong point that an employee cannot and should not wait for their manager to start the conversation. They need to initiate it as well.

Beverly Kaye is currently working on a new book, which is due in 2012. The new book is tentatively entitled Help Them Grow Or Watch Them Go and will be a book for managers to deal with career development issues. For more information visit the website of Career Systems International at http://www.careersystemsintl.com/.

Thanks to Michelle Zionkowski and especially to Lorianne Speaks for coordinating and facilitating this conversation with Beverly Kaye.

Sales managers are responsible to both their employees and the companies for which they work. That means that team managers need to hire and keep the best people possible.
Most salespeople, typically, do not fall into either extreme of being the ultimate sales machine or being unbridled failures. The typical salesperson falls somewhere in-between.

This is where the manager’s job gets intricate.

This salesperson needs a personal approach based on his character and preferences. This salesperson needs monitoring and motivation. This salesperson needs to be pushed, pulled, left alone or closely monitored based on the circumstance. There is no formula. The manager has to figure it out based on that salesperson’s particular qualities, goals or based on mutual agreement. The hard work will inch the employee forward towards becoming the top salesperson – but it took customized attention and more time, but it is worth it.

Several months ago I posted about Daniel Pink’s Drive. His assertion is that ‘creative’ employees and roles are better linked to non-monetary incentives once a base level of remuneration is reached and achieved.

http://www.alighaemi.com/wp/?p=522

Compensating employees that are wholly, or more likely partly, commission or bonus-based is still a matter of much argument. Pink’s synopsis of years of research into the subject suggests most companies have it wrong. In fact, whole companies and systems exist to figure out how to calculate the variable portion of employees’ pays.

www.varicent.com

www.callidussoftware.com

www.silverlinesales.co.uk

Others just make do with Excel.

However, fact is, most salespeople are still placed in a stick and carrot setting.

• Most are paid a commission based on either a goal of total revenue or profit margins. These are simple and based on desirable revenues and associated profits. The net earnings may be an explicit target. The notion is that the salesperson applies maximum pressure to customers to obtain the highest price available for goods or services in order to maximize revenue and profit.
• Companies have resorted to making gross profit the top incentive for salespersons in order to ensure the salesperson does not overly discount. The downside of such an approach is that salespersons might avoid engaging in sales that earn them little money, even though their employing company might actually need the revenue and cash flow at that time.
• Other incentive planners have resorted to creating tasks and challenges for the salesperson to achieve. These, typically, are accorded to more specialized sales functions such as marketing including telemarketing or technical pre-sales. Quota may revolve around number of calls, number of leads in the funnel, number of demos or customer visits and even customer feedback and satisfaction based on surveys. Negatively, such plans might indicate to the salesperson that once the target is attained further gains are nominal or not essential.
• From a salesperson’s perspective it is critical that the goals be explicit, simple and comprehensible. Capping a compensation plan might also allow for better budgeting, but is counterproductive given the penchant for work to slow down once 100% of goal – and payout – is attained. Companies and managers should also be mindful of creating convoluted and multi-pronged compensation plans that may not be easily, or at all, understood.

Like any relationship both sides win when both sides are satisfied. Management needs to consider the perspective of the employee before creating and operationalizing a plan.