I do not understand the rationale behind using such an intense and unecessary emotion in delivering a feedback, giving instructions or in coaching an employee. It baffles me seeing superiors riling over or even going maniacal over the most infinitesimal things! How pathetic! Is it really necessary to tip?
You might find this ludicrous but I don’t feel sorry for the person at the receiving end… at all. I am more concerned with the nondescript superiors permeating all the stresses and extreme pressures in their bodies, not to mention their visceras and veins bloating close to bursting in their skins, hormones in rage shooting up and down making their visions fuzzy, pupil dilating, eye balls popping off their sockets…sigh, sorry but they neither look pretty nor inticing. It is like, ‘Frankenstein in his suit’.
I think the first advice one can give them is to mount a mirror across their room or on their desks so they see their reflections whenever they’re steaming. Those steams off their ears do make them look like a train-wrecking-any-moment-now type of thing.
Is it really necessary to cause such a tremendous tremor and detrimental pressures in your body just to get your message accrossed?
Do you think it is the best methodology the world proffers, among the wide spectrum of media, in delivering information?
Will it be beneficial to our family or to the people we are working for to squander this much emotion? If you die now because of increased blood pressure or heart attack with your irresponsible utilization of emotions squishing you to extreme exhaustion, will your family be happy or appease with such a tragic end?
Will it assuage crises at work if you are rude to your people?
To be fair to all parties, we must take into account the impact of being ill-treated. Well, the most conspicuous would be the mental as well as physical ‘paralyses’.
Obviously, you freeze. If you are inside the boss’ room, you can’t move your feet to move out, the moment the sermon is over, thus, the boss ends up telling you to leave. The blood flow in your brain is impeded as the stress hormones gallivant about. You can’t focus.Your mind is literally and figuratively empty. Logic and creativity is just hampered, you cannot perform the way your boss wants you to now.
You have committed such a grave offense but in your mind, you wished that it would have been okay to fire you instead rather than to break your heart. And then, you feel that working for your boss is not worth it and that you can bring your talent elsewhere who will be tolerant of your learning curve or who is patient enough to teach you.
You then judges that your boss, that he does not deserve his post and that he is not a good leader and neither is he a good communicator. He does not know how to properly deliver a feedback. He isn’t a good coach or teacher. If he was, you could have been proofed from all the errors as everyone is bound to. You go to your desk, write your resignation letter. The company has spent so much for you and with you leaving, the company just lost a big sum.
WHY PEOPLE CAN BE RUDE?
If an employee asked the boss this question, the boss might burst into tears.
People who are innately rude inherited such behavior from their ancestors whilst people who are not usually rude have some latent issue that is built up once another issue arises, hence, becomes strangely furious.
Highly intellectual people (with some challenges on EQ) have intermittent episodes of this too. They learn everything fast and captured details in precision. Your normal pace-slow to moderate- frustrates them and since they are so not in-tuned with their body systems, they can shoot up and tip.
LEADERSHIP
GOD MUST HAVE TRUSTED YOU SO MUCH TO ENTRUST YOU HIS PEOPLE, catapulting you to be a leader of your team or organization.
First, is that you need to accept that you lack and you are not a god to be perfect. Read more and listen more.
Second is to realize that everything is temporary. Your people will not forever be your people. Have you heard of that security guard at work turned into a performing employee in the production? I have, I met him. It is shameful to ill-treat people doing the menial jobs at work because you’ll never know what they can become in the future. The worst part is you might end up reporting to them somewhere and sometime in the future, who knows?
Third, follow John Maxwell’s 101% principle and please discount emotion. Breathe if you must, smoke(for those who smoke) or take a breather by walking the floor or just go to the lobby and appreciate the nature or architecture or people passing by, before you coach or deliver a feedback.
The 101% principle- is wrenching out that 1% goodness out of the situation or of the person and focus your 100% attention to it by recognition and sincere affirmation before you address the issue.The person receiving the feedback will not feel bad about it and won’t take it personally. You have conveyed that you, as a leader, are absolutely not oblivious of your followers’ achievements because you tout that before you began.
Lastly, we ought to be reminded that there are things we can and cannot control. We should not waste our energy on those things we cannot control but focus on what we can. Followers misbehaving is controllable but inevitable, hence at the moment instances like this can be classified as uncontrollable.
We can't control our followers' reactions over particular issues but what we can definitely control is our emotions. Yes, we can control our emotions. It might take tons of practice (not genetic engineering of course) but we'll definitely can. If you have a hard time controlling your emotion, it's time to see a shrink or stop taking that drugs and ask your doctor for alternatives. You have a serious job to do.
“I am human. I am engineered to grapple with the imperfections, inherited from the genes of my ancestors, to be the best that I can be. However, along the way to greatness are pitfalls and so I sink sometimes. I need someone to raise me up and be patient with me and for them, I’ll forever be grateful and as a payback ,I will do the same to others.”- Homo sapiens sapiens
Friday, July 30, 2010
Friday, July 9, 2010
Is the probability of being promoted higher to those who are close to the boss? (The Science Behind Politics in the Workplace)
"Promotion only happens to those who bootlick!" I hear this reaction often in my classes. Others might not speak of it but they gesture, in a strong agreement whenever somebody vehemently expresses it.
Is being close to your boss advantageous in every angle as this relationship may possibly catapult you to a higher position? The answer is yes, with conviction. Ergo, do not be surprised that sooner or later that co-worker of yours, whom you deride as he/she overtly and shamelessly bootlicks, becomes the next boss of you!
The LMX theory of leadership explains why. The theory's focal point is on the “vertical linkages” or relationships of leaders with every direct report. The pursuit is investigating the effects of the degrees of proximity to the organization. Such relationships are categorized into two groups: the IN-GROUP and the OUT-GROUP.
The formation of these groups involves several steps. Everyone starts from 'testing' and identifying behaviors that suit best to the organization and fit more to the leader.Somewhere down the lane, the split happens.
The In-Group's relationship with their leader is based on mutual trust, liking, and reciprocal influence. The group members receive more information, influence than the rest of the subordinates. Additionally they are more dependable, highly involved and more communicative than the rest of subordinates.With Out-Group, the leader uses traditional supervisory approach, and the employee helps the leader strictly based on his resposibilities as a subordinate, not further. In other words, they come to work, do the job, and then go home. (http://www.bealeader.net/109/the-lmx-leadership-theory)
In essence,the in-group holds strong ties with their leader whilst the out-group is at a distance following what the job scope states. The in-group is more updated and more likely to be given special projects as they show more enthusiasm and share the same views with their leader than the other group.
This might have thrown an organization off-balance as the out-group are deprived of opportunity to improve and grow. However, it has been proven that organizations succeed and grow more with in-group's endeavors, hence, the in-grouper's are more likely to be catapulted to higher posts as the organization grows over time.
It could have been a lot a better if leaders have the capacity to create an excellent working relationships among all their people. We hope that they have the patience to deal with individual differences or at least attempt to understand difficult individuals and the root of their behaviors. They must be the catalyst of change and foster an excellent quality LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGES.
Is being close to your boss advantageous in every angle as this relationship may possibly catapult you to a higher position? The answer is yes, with conviction. Ergo, do not be surprised that sooner or later that co-worker of yours, whom you deride as he/she overtly and shamelessly bootlicks, becomes the next boss of you!
The LMX theory of leadership explains why. The theory's focal point is on the “vertical linkages” or relationships of leaders with every direct report. The pursuit is investigating the effects of the degrees of proximity to the organization. Such relationships are categorized into two groups: the IN-GROUP and the OUT-GROUP.
The formation of these groups involves several steps. Everyone starts from 'testing' and identifying behaviors that suit best to the organization and fit more to the leader.Somewhere down the lane, the split happens.
The In-Group's relationship with their leader is based on mutual trust, liking, and reciprocal influence. The group members receive more information, influence than the rest of the subordinates. Additionally they are more dependable, highly involved and more communicative than the rest of subordinates.With Out-Group, the leader uses traditional supervisory approach, and the employee helps the leader strictly based on his resposibilities as a subordinate, not further. In other words, they come to work, do the job, and then go home. (http://www.bealeader.net/109/the-lmx-leadership-theory)
In essence,the in-group holds strong ties with their leader whilst the out-group is at a distance following what the job scope states. The in-group is more updated and more likely to be given special projects as they show more enthusiasm and share the same views with their leader than the other group.
This might have thrown an organization off-balance as the out-group are deprived of opportunity to improve and grow. However, it has been proven that organizations succeed and grow more with in-group's endeavors, hence, the in-grouper's are more likely to be catapulted to higher posts as the organization grows over time.
It could have been a lot a better if leaders have the capacity to create an excellent working relationships among all their people. We hope that they have the patience to deal with individual differences or at least attempt to understand difficult individuals and the root of their behaviors. They must be the catalyst of change and foster an excellent quality LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGES.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)