Vicki Anderson

Have you noticed how different leaders focus on different things? As I met with a client today I was reminded that how followers behave is often dependent on the leader they choose to follow. Some leaders focus on integrity and make everything they do point to the integrity of the situation and the people involved. While integrity is important to almost everyone, it is not the only reason people follow a leader.

Some people follow leaders because they get things done. They are active people themselves and pride themselves on accomplishment. They will get bored working for someone who spends most of the time on analysis to get fewer things done, but done right. Others may find the analysis stimulating and comforting to know each solution is well thought out.

Some people follow leaders because they are people oriented. They are involved with their followers and give them a sense of belonging. It feels good to be a part of this team and there is a lot of camaraderie.

So, is there a right way to lead? Of course not. Each of us has a natural focus and often a combination of focuses that guide our method of leading. The key issue is in why someone would follow you. Looking at the situation involved, it is important to understand which focus of leadership might be needed. If that is not a strength of yours, you might need to bring in someone else to help lead. That person could even be someone within your team.

It is not only the situation and your natural focus, but the need of the people you are leading. They may have varying needs at any one time and you will have to adapt your leadership style to fit their need if you want to achieve the most results from them.

Using consistent consequences takes a lot of effort on the part of a supervisor, but it pays big dividends in fewer disciplinary issues. People know their responsibility and what will happen if they decide not to live up to it. It is always advisable to set the stage correctly upfront by clearly communicating your expectations for their performance. Remember that not everyone has the same standards as you or the same priorities in the way they look at their work. If you want them to be on the same page as you, you have to tell them what your standards and priorities are. Here’s a sample approach to a common problem—employees leaving the breakroom a mess.

Have an employee meeting and ask for their help in keeping the breakroom clean. Impress to them that you are happy to provide this common space for their use, especially if you use it too. Since it is for the use of all, it is the responsibility of everyone to be good neighbors and help keep it clean. You expect people to throw away their trash and wipe up any messes they make. You will provide general cleaning service to help maintain the overall cleanliness. Let them know that if they choose not to be a good neighbor by leaving their food and trash lying around creating unsanitary conditions for others, you will remind them of their responsibility once. If you have to talk with them about it a second time, you will assume they have chosen not to live up to their responsibility for using the breakroom and are barred from using it again. Don’t make everyone suffer for the poor choices of a few. Ask people to help each other by politely encouraging each other to keep their area clean.

You may tell anyone who has been barred that they can be reinstated if they come to you and tell you what they will do to earn your trust again and use the facility appropriately. In other words, say that they are willing to take responsibility for their actions and understand the consequences.

Let’s be perfectly clear that threats are not appropriate when talking about consequences. I believe in giving people choices up front. When you tell people clearly what you expect from their performance, express your confidence in their ability to succeed and your willingness to provide resources to help them. Where it is appropriate, let them know what could happen if they don’t succeed. Consequences should start with follow up conversations to determine root causes for failures or lapses in judgment.

Supervisors play a key role in helping people make good choices in their behaviors, so use consequences wisely and consistently for consistent performance results.

“Isn’t consequences the same thing as punishment?” someone asked me recently. “Not really,” I answered.

This association of words often keeps supervisors from following up on their employees’ unacceptable performance. You see, we associate “consequences” with “what happens when you mess up.” Consequences are issued to unruly children and teenagers who make poor behavior choices in order to help them learn appropriate behaviors. However, the same concept can be used with adults. Punishment, on the other hand, has an emotional component that is supposed to make you feel bad for what you did.

Consequences are actually what happen as a result of your actions. Consequences can be positive or negative. For example, when a salesman signs a new customer, he might receive a bonus, which is a pleasant consequence. On the other hand, an employee who makes a careless safety error may receive a reprimand, which is an unpleasant consequence.

The problem lies in inconsistent consequences. If consequences only happen when someone does something wrong, they feel like punishment to the person receiving it. If you want to see consistent results from your people, then you have to use consistent consequences. Make sure that people hear lots of good news from you when they are performing well. Don’t be a recognition miser and don’t wait for the super achievement to give recognition. Reward consistent positive results and efforts toward behavior improvement. People want to know that what they do pleases you. You have a lot of power to inspire achievement if you will use it.

Be also free with natural consequences if you see incorrect behavior. This is difficult for many supervisors so they wait too long before giving consequences. Thus it gets escalated to disciplinary action quickly. Instead, give people useful information that will help them get back on the correct path immediately while there is no emotion attached to it. Just as you quickly pull your hand back from a hot pan when cooking, employees ought to know where the limits are by your quick reaction to near misses, not crises. Discuss lessons learned and apply the “what happened, why did it happen, and how can we keep this from happening again” approach. In this way, natural consequences are follow-up actions in response to incorrect or unacceptable behavior. The purpose is not to make the employee feel bad, but help them be successful the next time.

I’m so tired of hearing leaders say one thing and do another. I often want to ask them, “Do you really believe what you are saying?” Although we always hope someone is truthful, we have become skeptical listeners.

How many times have we heard politicians, sports figures, executives, and others vehemently deny something that has come out in the media, only to confess meekly that it is true some time later. Whatever happened to integrity? Whatever happened to owning up to what you did and taking your lumps? It always seemed to me that the punishment was never nearly as bad as the anticipation of it was. People are pretty forgiving, they just don’t like lying.

How many times have we heard people come right out and say the truth even if it is hard to hear? Not very often. It’s no wonder that trust is so difficult to cultivate in the workplace. Employees fear they are being lied to and wait to see if what managers say is really true. They watch not only what you say but what you do. If you want employees to engage and contribute honestly to your workplace, be honest. Be consistently truthful even when it’s hard. The result is strength, loyalty and caring–the results of integrity.

I have been reading all the stories and comments running around about the upcoming changes for The Tonight Show with Conan O’Brien and Jay Leno’s prime time cancellation. One common point brought out was that both men were put into different spots and their styles didn’t translate well enough to garner the audiences they had in their previous time slots.

I think this is often typical of personnel moves in all fields. You take an outstanding salesperson and make her a sales manager. She knows how to sell and has great people skills, but she doesn’t have leadership skills for coaching, delegating, and planning. She knows how to do, but not how to lead. The skills that made her successful in her previous slot won’t make her successful in her new slot.

Even though the new person wants the new role, there are new expectations that are not often communicated or coached, so when the failure occurs, senior management shakes its head and says, “It’s too bad. They had so much potential.”

Where is the coaching, the mentoring, and the support to make the person translate to the new role successfully? Has the new person been open to the coaching of others or has ego in their new role shut down that opportunity? I don’t know how much of this happened to Jay Leno or Conan O’Brien, but it is sad to see two successful comedians, each with a following and confidence from NBC, turn their new shows into ratings losses and hurt their reputations as well as NBC.