Category: Articles

Here’s a formula that I just came up with for those of you accustomed to reading “step” programs and slick formulas: Integrity (“Walking the talk”) encourages trust, trust builds respect, respect activates commitment, commitment feeds dedication, dedication strengthens work ethic, work ethic fuels productivity… I’ll stop now or the circle would get too big before I tie it all back to integrity. I might map it out in flashy colours and copyright it someday, but you get the picture.

The thing is, I could have continued to attach all kinds of values to that formula, because once you come down to it, values do tend to be related. Just ask anyone to pick 5 core values from a list of 50, and you’ll see what I mean. You’ll hear people talk about how respect is part of trust and trust is part of commitment, and so on. And it all makes intuitive sense, so if I had said passion nourishes creativity, and creativity fuels productivity you would very possibly have sagely nodded your head. That’s one reason why there are so many marketed management formulas out there. You can say the same thing in many different ways.

What it comes down to is this: People are drawn to values and they like to feel valued. They like to feel good about themselves, and they’d prefer to work in a place where they feel good than a place where they don’t. And by now, we have a pretty good idea of what makes people feel good. As Maslow noted a fairly long time ago, people have a series of needs (Physiological, Safety, Love/Belonging, Esteem, and Self-actualization). If you want to mange people effectively, it would do you good to value the meeting of those needs.

If you on the other hand don’t pay people enough, provide inconsistent feedback, disregard physical safety and harassment issues, alienate your staff by treating them as nameless objects, display favoritism, make arbitrary decisions without consulting the people who will be most impacted by these decisions, fail to acknowledge success and focus more on criticism, and do not provide opportunity for people to grow, you should not be too surprised at seeing the departing backsides of your best and brightest. What’s more, you will likely be saddled with sycophants (“suck-ups”) and the less inspired staff who stay out of fear or lack of ambition, and who content themselves with the spiritless mantra, “It’s just a job”.  Plus, of course, you’ll have the additional expenses of sick leaves, absenteeism, theft (of time and material), harassments and legal issues that research has consistently shown as associated with organizations lacking in clearly stated, collaboratively formed, and followed values that take into account the needs of employees.

Values are what your organization stands for, and by inference, if created collaboratively, what your employees stand for-and by further inference it means that employees will stand for the organization. Values are what define your organization and all of its associated behaviours and interactions with every stakeholder, be it management, staff, suppliers, clients, or the community. Think of a stated value as being a vow, and you will begin to understand how significant it is for an organization to not only identify its values, but to live them.

Here is where integrity comes in; few things will create more disharmony, disenchantment, demoralization, and cynicism than an organization or person that professes to hold certain values and doesn’t follow through with them. I’ve been part of an organization that professed to be strength based but management took every opportunity to highlight staff weaknesses. The impact of that on morale and trust and all those other values was dramatic. It would have been better if that organization had clearly stated a lack of values rather than having dragged staff through the appearance of care and collaboration on a values search, only to pay lip service to the outcome.

The truth is, you can’t escape having values, and the values expressed through behavours are always experienced as more real than those via words. An organization that states collaboration as a value but does not consult with staff about significant decisions is actually living out a value of expediency over process. An organization that purports to value respect but allows for gossiping is actually living out a negative competitive value. The loss of trust, commitment, passion, dedication, buy in, respect, etc cost of this double talk is hugely significant. Employees begin to look out for “number one” as they realize that they can’t count on leadership to care for their needs, or they do the instinctive tribal thing, and gather together in cliques for protection. In any case, there is the loss of a spiritual, (yes, “spiritual”) connection with the organization. In fact, I will even go so far to say that the organization itself will have lost its soul. For sure it will have lost its direction and connection to the people who make up and drive it.

Integrity does indeed work. It pays off in tangible staff buy in and production and it shines in the organization’s everyday interaction with all its stakeholders. It’s the value that holds everyone accountable to shared values and reasons for being. It’s what underlies never devalued wishes of “practice what you preach”, and “walk the talk” that we all hold true to from childhood years.  Lose integrity at the risk of losing everything else that holds your organization together and makes it a vital living thing.

Theo Selles, M.Sc.
647-686-0116

Like most things people can love or hate, the topic of emails can generate some very strong emotions. While some of us seem to relish sending off volumes of emails complete with stupid pet trick u-tube attachments and motivational poems, others dread their overflowing inboxes and mutter about information overload. The latter (let’s call them “Informationers”) wish that the former would understand how busy they are. In their opinion, emails should be used only “professionally” for passing on critical organizational information such as meeting times, training opportunities, and programming updates. The former (we’ll call them “Connectors”) often wish that the latter would just “lighten up”. They would argue that what they do is all part of relationship and morale building

There certainly can exist a huge divide amongst colleagues concerning email use, and like most divides, it can create misunderstanding and resentment if not fairly addressed. Perhaps it will be helpful from a perspective taking purpose to understand that this issue did not begin with email. Those of us who predate email may remember our parents sternly admonishing us, “The phone is not for talking; it’s for taking messages!”

Of course it is important to remember context. When we were answering the phone while being harassed by our parents, we weren’t at work. Clearly time at work and use of office equipment should be related to the benefit of our employer.  But even that perspective does not fully answer the question as to what is appropriate use of email. Both information sharing and connection building are vital aspects of organizational culture and effectiveness. The trick, it would seem, is to establish an email etiquette that manages to incorporate the best of both of these functions.

Thankfully, much of the solution is rooted in common sense. If we think of email as simply another form of communication, we can realize that we know a great deal about communication and what does and does not work. It’s actually when email is treated as somehow another animal for which separate communication rules apply, or for whom the usual rules don’t apply, do we get into trouble. Courtesy, intentionality, thoughtfulness, decency, politeness, clarity, inclusiveness, respectfulness, all are among the components of everyday effective communication and should be applied to all our interactions with each other, and email should be no exception. Seen that way, there need not be a choice between connection building and information sharing as the two can share a similar process.

Intentionality in emails as in every aspect of communication is significant. Are you simply sending information that you believe the recipient should be privy to? If so, you may not require an extended response, though you can still send it politely. And if you receive such an information email from a sender, you can certainly still acknowledge reception and say “thank you”. Functionality and practicality should never be used as excuses for the absence of civility. It takes less than five seconds to acknowledge an email that takes minutes to read. Those five seconds can be a key component to maintaining a relationship between yourself and the sender, unless you know for sure that they would prefer you didn’t reply.

Intentionality is also something to be considered upon receiving a “connection” email from a colleague. How many of us who complain about how work overload gets in the way of everyday decencies such as supporting each other become irritated when a colleague emails us a “frivolous” poem or thought in the middle of our busy day? “Don’t they know how busy we are and how cluttered our inbox is!” So much is about perspective. If we instead thought about how a colleague took the time to think of us and thought enough of us that they wanted to make us smile, perhaps we would feel differently (and even be more energized to do our work). How might it affect the culture of an organization if now and then coworkers sent out a “thank you” or “good job” email to each other out of the blue?

The flip side of that is true as well. As with verbal communication, simply “email talking” or rambling on indiscriminately at length without considering the timing or needs of ones intended recipient is not appropriate either. Bearing that in mind will help curtail the length, frequency, and content of emails sent so that colleagues don’t begin to tune you out and do have time to perform their work functions.

What follows are some general communication rules and how they apply to email.

1. Don’t yell. (Don’t USE UPPER CASE LETTERS IN YOUR EMAIL or overuse exclamation marks!!!!!)
2. Don’t dominate the conversation. (Don’t send tons of lengthy emails and attachments which may carry viruses. Try to keep your email communication as succinct as possible and avoid run-on sentences and marathon paragraphs.
3. Be clear and upfront about what you wish to convey. (Identify your topic clearly in your email heading).
4. Don’t stalk or be controlling. (Don’t demand a “Read Receipt”).
5. Maintain confidences and don’t gossip. (Don’t “Reply all” unless it’s necessary or if you’re asked, and don’t forward an email unless you know it’s okay with the original sender).
6. Don’t talk just for the sake of talking. (Don’t send emails to any or all staff unless you know exactly what you want to convey and how it will benefit each of the people who receive your email).
7. Think before you talk and don’t quickly react or respond out of anger (Emails are permanent and can be held against you. Consider the implications and consequences of your words. In line with that, re-read emails before sending them as improper spelling and grammar impacts your professional image).
8. Write professionally. Do not use MSN chat style writing at work. Avoid cutesy abbreviations, (“u” instead of “you”), emoticons, and above all else, please don’t LOL or LMAO!!
9. Be aware and sensitive about your choices of language and humour. (Harassment policies extend to emails).
10. Only claim that something is a crisis when it really is. (Avoid using the “high priority” function unless absolutely necessary).
11. Be open-minded and curious. (Think of the intent behind the received email and try to see the  value in it).
12. Use your manners. (“Please” and “Thank you” have a place in most non-spam emails).
13. Be patient. (Don’t expect an immediate response as people may not check their email as often as you do, or they may be so swamped they can’t keep up).
14. Don’t ignore someone. (Do acknowledge receiving an email when you can even if only briefly. See rule “11”).
15. Be direct with people. (Don’t use email as a way of avoiding dealing with colleagues or as a substitute for in-person conversation if possible. This is particularly true for issues of conflict resolution).
16. Let it go! (Don’t indefinitely store emails. Clear out your emails periodically and delete unneeded messages.)

The nature of communication through any system has an enormous impact on the experience and functioning of its parts, and ultimately the health and functioning of the system as a whole. Email, as with any form of communication, can serve various important functions. It can serve as a vehicle to efficiently and quickly convey vital information. And, it is also a tool that can enhance equally vital connection and team spirit. Whether emails are burdensome, or are experienced positively and contribute to team functioning and growth, is dependent on people simply following common sense rules about communication that they likely already know.

Theo Selles, M.Sc.
647-686-0116

Interesting question isn’t it, and don’t tell me you’ve never asked it before. Think for a moment. Ask yourself, “Have you really changed over the years?”

Chances are you’ll say something like, “Yes, in some ways, but not in others.” Now ask yourself, “How many people do you know who have really changed over the time that you’ve known them?” Chances are you won’t think of many. I’ve noticed over my years of consulting that people are far more likely to credit themselves with the ability to change than they are others.

Of course, for some, not changing is considered a sign of strength. Staying constant shows stability and reliability. Why make unnecessary changes? Perhaps it’s an expectation we have living in a world where truisms like, “Change is inevitable” and “Change is constant” abound. We’re expected to be able to adapt, learn, grow, and at times, we’re expected to be able to eliminate unwanted habits and behaviours and replace them with more desired ones. So maybe the question should be, “How many people do you know who have changed after saying that they needed or wanted to?”

The question of whether people can change is an important one in relationships and in the workplace. Performance appraisals and evaluations would be rather pointless if people weren’t able to make use of the feedback that they were given. Of course, there are people who do claim that these exercises are pointless, and that the trick is to get the right people straight away rather than wasting time attempting to force square pegs into round holes.

The question regarding the possibility of change is complicated by the fact that people argue over what constitutes real change. Is a change in behaviour a significant change, or are changes in thinking and even personality what’s needed to qualify for “real” change. After all, people do seem to fall back into old habits, especially when they’re trying to change for somebody else. How long does a change have to last in order to count as a change?

Sufficient self-help and motivational instruction books have been written about this topic to denude half the world’s rainforests. Enough already! I’m going to answer the question once and for all. Think of it as my contribution to end Global Warming.

YES, people can change, BUT only some of them and only some of the time. From my experience, there are 10 key factors required for people to change. The more any of these factors are missing, the less likely it will be for change to happen. In order to change people must:

1) Be aware of the need for change
2) Want to change
3) Possess a sense of curiosity
4) Have the ability to self-reflect and be self-aware
5) Be open to feedback (the absence of defensiveness)
6) Know what specifically needs to change and what will replace it
7) Understand how to change
8) Receive constructive feedback throughout the change process
9) Be given emotional support and encouragement throughout the change process
10) Gain some kind of personal reward (reinforcement) from having changed

If all, or at least most, of those factors are in place for people, change is indeed possible. The longer the change lasts, the greater the likelihood of the change becoming a part of who they are, and then they won’t have to keep concentrating on maintaining it. But you can see from reading this list why change can be so difficult to achieve.

The two factors of them all that seem critical to the capacity to change is the presence of a sense of curiosity and the ability to self-reflect and be self-aware. Some people have an innate curiosity about the world and that greatly aids them in making changes. It could be argued that generally we all start off being curious and then many of us seem to lose it, but once lost, curiosity seems very hard to retrieve. And I strongly recommend managers include job interview questions which invite candidates to share times when they’ve thought about their thoughts and made a belief change or a change in their way of thinking. Self-aware and self-reflective people are for more likely to be able to adapt and make tough personal changes.

An Executive friend of mine claims that only 10% of people are capable of real change. He figures it’s much better to find out what his people are good at and have them focus on that, rather than waste time and resources trying to change them into something they’re not. That’s a good strategy especially if you have the Human Resources available to fill in the gaps, but perhaps not always possible.

If it’s critical to you that a person you’re relating with make some changes in order for the relationship to work, (either professionally or personally) think of all the factors that need to be present for change to occur. Consider the advice of my friend, and the possibility that you need to accept that the person you’re dealing with may not be a good fit, or perhaps is a great fit in a role with different expectations.

On the other hand, knowing and applying the requirements for change can make it much easier for people to create the changes they want (if that’s truly what they want).

Theo Selles, M.Sc.
President, Integrity Works
647-686-0116