I never had it and probably never will. I want and expect things to be accomplished quickly and efficiently. I get frustrated when it is taking longer than I expect to handle almost any issue. I've always thought that my urgency was a positive personal quality. Short cycle times means efficiency. But does it? Last year I had the opportunity to learn an important lesson about patience; one that I expect will change the way I look at the future.
One of our more experienced sales people, although only with us for just over a year, had come off of a very poor year of production - something like 30% of quota, which meant that they were costing us more than they were generating. The portion of the prior year they worked for us was equally disappointing. Most sales organizations don't stand for that kind of poor production. I didn't think we should either.
But their manager was supportive, expressing that the rep was "doing all the right things." Not wanting to take the baton from the manager's hands, I agreed to participate in some of their one on one meetings to learn for myself. I investigated their sales process - it looked surprisingly good. I sat in on a pipeline review - it looked promising. I decided to wait another quarter before forcing a decision. Others in the organization told me I was getting soft.
Another quarter came and went with no appreciable production. I revisted the conversation with their manager again. And once again I was told that production was coming. But my patience was wearning thin. I heard echos of my critics calling me soft. I was growing impatient.
We girded for what I expected to be another disappointing quarter. To my surprise and great satisfaction, my patience was repaid, again and again and again. Not only did the sales rep improve, but they ended up producing three times their annual quota during the remainder of the year.
Since then, I've probably not grown much in the patience department. I still get frustrated when things don't happen quickly enough. But now I religiously rely on my managers to "prove" out their points of view and suspend my impatience in anticipation of even greater future results.
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Start with Why
As is my usual habit during the holidays, I've read several books these past few weeks. One I just completed was Start with Why by Simon Sinek. Mr. Sinek's premise is that all organizations can describe "what" they do, some can explan "how" they do it, but few can describe "why." He suggests that the only sustainable way to be a leader, whether it be a person or an organization is to start by describing "why" you do what you do. And that "why" ought to be much more than just plain monetarily focused.
Thinking about this personally, I discovered that I too need a "why". I've often tried to put the pieces together to determine where I am in my life's work and and perhaps how I got here. In fact I truly believe that we are all put on this earth to make a difference. And my difference is to share what I know and how I know to do it, to make others great. I do it in business, I certainly try to do it with my kids, and I do it through my work with my alma matter, Union College, and the other schools where I am invited to work directly with the students.
At Force 3, my "why" is the same. I am privileged to have been invited to participate at an executive level of this very successful company that has existed without me for almost two decades. And I came to Force 3 with no background in working in the federal government market and no experience working with a product reseller. So why did they need me, and what business did I have thinking I could help?
My background for the past decade plus has been working with founder-led companies that are trying to increase their scale. What I have found consistently in each of these experiences is that in order to do so, a founder-led company needs to change. It needs to go beyond a single powerful and effective leader who up to a certain size can virtually touch every person every day, to one where others now need to take on this role. Morphing from this personal founder-led touch, to one where these touches need to be multiplied and come from others, is a difficult and non-intuitive task. It requires a different approach than just about any founder has known in their past.
The founders whom I have had the honor to work with have all been quite capable. They all have beat the odds, created valuable entities from scratch. My role has always been the same. Take the magic they have performed and somehow multiply this over a larger group of employees at a greater scale than ever before.
To do so, in each case, has required the identification and the development of new leaders. No matter what the industry, or even the size of the entity, it has always been the same. My "what" is that I work hard to identify people with capabilities who perhaps have not yet been sufficiently challenged to take on a new role, a new identity, or a new set of skills. What I have found is that there often are people within these organizations who are capable of taking on their new leadership positions, though in many cases they are not certain they are up for the task.
Most times it is not easy. Embracing change is not something that most of us humans are much good at. We crave routines, we like certainty, and we are likely quite good at doing the jobs we are doing today. My "how" is moving their proverbial "cheese" and forcing them outside of their comfort zones. Then giving them some insights, tools and methods for moving forward with these new opportunities.
My challenge is getting people to agree to follow my leadership. I am usually the new guy, the interloper, the one who will now interfere with their personal relationships with the founder. The task is often daunting.
As with most organizations, my "what"s are very clear. My "hows" have been honed from years of trial and error. And now, I have found a new tool to help me leverage these "hows." Starting today, I'm starting with "why." I'm going to always be sure that the people I am working first know my "why". Why I do what I do is that I get real joy and satisfaction from taking someone who is capable but untested and unsure, and challenging them to take on bigger and more important roles than ever before. Getting them to try new things, give up old routines, and make a much larger impact than they ever thought possible.
Unfortunately, sometimes there are casualties. But often, these are outweighed by the value that is brought to the organization, and perhaps most important, by the increasing capabilities of the people who decide to take on the challenge.
Perhaps my "why" in genetic. My mother spent more than three decades as a grade school teacher. She even taught my own first grade class for several days as a substitute teacher. Whether this is genetic or has grown over my years of experience. I am now very sure that this is my "why." And, I am looking forward to seeing how starting with my own "why" will improve the odds of my success.
Thinking about this personally, I discovered that I too need a "why". I've often tried to put the pieces together to determine where I am in my life's work and and perhaps how I got here. In fact I truly believe that we are all put on this earth to make a difference. And my difference is to share what I know and how I know to do it, to make others great. I do it in business, I certainly try to do it with my kids, and I do it through my work with my alma matter, Union College, and the other schools where I am invited to work directly with the students.
At Force 3, my "why" is the same. I am privileged to have been invited to participate at an executive level of this very successful company that has existed without me for almost two decades. And I came to Force 3 with no background in working in the federal government market and no experience working with a product reseller. So why did they need me, and what business did I have thinking I could help?
My background for the past decade plus has been working with founder-led companies that are trying to increase their scale. What I have found consistently in each of these experiences is that in order to do so, a founder-led company needs to change. It needs to go beyond a single powerful and effective leader who up to a certain size can virtually touch every person every day, to one where others now need to take on this role. Morphing from this personal founder-led touch, to one where these touches need to be multiplied and come from others, is a difficult and non-intuitive task. It requires a different approach than just about any founder has known in their past.
The founders whom I have had the honor to work with have all been quite capable. They all have beat the odds, created valuable entities from scratch. My role has always been the same. Take the magic they have performed and somehow multiply this over a larger group of employees at a greater scale than ever before.
To do so, in each case, has required the identification and the development of new leaders. No matter what the industry, or even the size of the entity, it has always been the same. My "what" is that I work hard to identify people with capabilities who perhaps have not yet been sufficiently challenged to take on a new role, a new identity, or a new set of skills. What I have found is that there often are people within these organizations who are capable of taking on their new leadership positions, though in many cases they are not certain they are up for the task.
Most times it is not easy. Embracing change is not something that most of us humans are much good at. We crave routines, we like certainty, and we are likely quite good at doing the jobs we are doing today. My "how" is moving their proverbial "cheese" and forcing them outside of their comfort zones. Then giving them some insights, tools and methods for moving forward with these new opportunities.
My challenge is getting people to agree to follow my leadership. I am usually the new guy, the interloper, the one who will now interfere with their personal relationships with the founder. The task is often daunting.
As with most organizations, my "what"s are very clear. My "hows" have been honed from years of trial and error. And now, I have found a new tool to help me leverage these "hows." Starting today, I'm starting with "why." I'm going to always be sure that the people I am working first know my "why". Why I do what I do is that I get real joy and satisfaction from taking someone who is capable but untested and unsure, and challenging them to take on bigger and more important roles than ever before. Getting them to try new things, give up old routines, and make a much larger impact than they ever thought possible.
Unfortunately, sometimes there are casualties. But often, these are outweighed by the value that is brought to the organization, and perhaps most important, by the increasing capabilities of the people who decide to take on the challenge.
Perhaps my "why" in genetic. My mother spent more than three decades as a grade school teacher. She even taught my own first grade class for several days as a substitute teacher. Whether this is genetic or has grown over my years of experience. I am now very sure that this is my "why." And, I am looking forward to seeing how starting with my own "why" will improve the odds of my success.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)