Templates exist for best practices job descriptions. Some templates hit the mark and others fall short. Our article outlines the minimum goals to be attained by job description creation as well as some helpful guidelines to writing a custom description. Rarely can an organization pull a job description "off the shelf" from another organization and apply it without essential modification. Consider a job description model only a starting point and invest the effort into customizing the instrument to your organization and your unique job. The exercise of doing so offers value in itself.
For starters, let us explore the goals. A strong job description will...
Serve as an effective tool for employee selection and orientation to specific position duties and evaluation criteria.
Establish a training checklist for new hires or incumbent job changes.
Provide a point-by-point quality of work itemization for performance appraisals and ongoing performance management.
Document position goals and performance standards.
Protect the firm from legal risks through written documentation of position requirements. Establish ADA, FLSA and EEOC compliance.
Benchmark the position for accurate compensation scale review.
Facilitate a merit-based compensation system by clearly identifying distinguishing characteristics between positions and position levels.
Communicate recruitment parameters to safeguard the hiring process.
Effectively distribute workload among team members to ensure organizational “right sizing.”
Manage legal risks in employment law by comprehensively documenting the position requirements and performance requirements.
Allow team members to measure their own performances between formal performance appraisals.
Establish individual accountability.
Internally market the position to each relevant team member through controlled terminology and quick communication of the “keys to success” in the position.
Enhance training and thereby minimize relevant turnover.
Validate the need for pre-employment testing/screening toward legal risk management.
Protect team members not selected for promotion from failure to understand selection decisions. Protect the company from challenged decisions.
Assist supervisors with the performance appraisal system by providing written reminders of the goals and expectations actually communicated to the team members.
Job Analysis should involve both incumbent employees and their supervisors. Not only should the tasks and position goals be documented, but in crafting and weighting such considerations, the keys to success and risks of failure should also be considered. The consideration and the documentation of facts are two different things. The final product will be edited and filtered for content and purpose. As an example, we document what an employee is responsible to do to avert problems, but we do not necessarily document the potential problems themselves.
Typical categories of information include Job Title, Immediate Supervisor, FLSA Status, Mission/Summary, Essential Tasks & Responsibilities, Supervisory Responsibility, Job Requirements, Working Conditions, Physical Demands, Skills & Learning Goals, and Disclaimer of Management Ability to Modify. Some descriptions may include Department, Pay Grade, Work Hours, Location/Site Travel and more.
When crafting language, measurable benchmarks must be present to ensure the standards are meaningful and reliable. Legally compliant language is essential to ensure compliance and perception of compliance at every stage of employment. Desirable behaviors should be documented in detailed description. While some label behaviors as"soft skills," successful leadership recognizes that behaviors drive results often more than skills do. Behaviors need to be measured both on the job and at pre-employment assessment. The HRS Assessment Center supports just that! Owning a characteristic is not as important at appropriately deploying that characteristic when it counts. In order to pay a bill, one needs not only to have the money but also to write the check.
Job analysis questionnaires, sample job descriptions, outsource assistance and more information are available from HRS. We wish you great success with your project!
Jessica Ollenburg - Monday, September 26, 2011
- Trackback Link
- Post has no trackbacks.
Countless unemployed individuals with plenty of time to write are emerging again with salary negotiation strategies. While it is true that strategies should change with market conditions, in many cases, negotiation should disappear completely. While many form their viewpoint based upon experiences with one or a few employers which eventually “outplaced” them, our analysis is based upon statistical knowledge working with thousands of preferred employers plus extraordinary research concerning hundreds of thousands over three decades and adapted to present conditions.
The following is a proven 6-rule blueprint to getting the most from “employers of choice.” Sure, there are plenty of bad bosses and exploitative companies out there who do not follow appropriate protocol. However, if you are a candidate worthy of a top employer, ignore what happens at substandard employers and subscribe to what works at top companies.
Rule #1: Top employers offer compensation based upon compensable factors, internal/external equities and merit-based performance proven within the organization. For top employers, the base compensation component is non-negotiable at organizational entry, except possibly at C-level.
Rule #2: Top employers do not pay you for what you did for someone else, but rather what you will do for them. Success in one environment is not necessarily transferable to another. Top employers know this. Top employers also know that overall organizational development is optimized by practices which favor merit advancement from within.
Rule #3: Top employers request salary histories up front not to set your pay accordingly but rather to evaluate equities and expectations before continuing the very costly pre-employment screening process. Failure to provide history when requested risks indication of unwillingness/inability to follow direction and/or indication of something to hide.
Rule #4: Salary negotiation is effective in a very limited sector. It can be effective only when handled correctly and in cases where the job description requires heavy amounts of negotiation implementation. Time, place and audience are paramount. Don’t be the first to bring up money, and don’t wait too long after money is mentioned to reveal that your requirements are higher. Attach compensation requests to your delivery of quantifiable results to the new employer. “I respect that the company has valued this position based upon specific metrics and expected outcomes. Based upon my history of success, extraordinary knowledge and my determination to succeed, I expect to deliver outcomes beyond those benchmarks. Is there opportunity for me to share in those financial successes? Can we set my quotas higher?”
Rule #5: Attempting negotiation risks the entire deal. It expresses discontent with the company’s existing practices and with the immediate job. Just as a counteroffer constitutes an offer rejection, negotiation of any types constitutes rejection of the “as is” opportunity. There is usually another candidate right behind you who is appreciative of the opportunity to earn rewards without staunch demands.
Rule #6: If the relationship begins with negotiation, expect that you have set the tone for continued negotiation. Rather than being awarded what you have earned, expect that you shall need to always negotiate for it. The best way to avoid constant negotiation with your company as an “opponent” rather than a “teammate” is to negotiate all at once a gain-sharing program with pre-determined financial rewards for the outcomes and results you facilitate.
When an offer is presented, please know that taking time to consider may risk the opportunity. Some companies will volunteer a proposed timeframe for your decision. Many will not. It is a myth that immediate acceptance makes you look “desperate.” Actually, failure to immediately accept makes you look “hesitant” and possibly “disinterested,” either of which can immediately sandbag the relationship. If you believe it is best to take time to consider, state your unwavering interest up front. Consider a safe explanation of the rationale behind your decision delay. If the screening process was thorough and involved multiple steps, you should have entered the offer stage ready to accept if offered. Your questions should already be answered and your interest should not falter.
Company cost control, lifelong learning, succession planning and sustainability are key organizational goals. Age discrimination can be a factor, and advancement from within is typically a preference. Employers are reluctant to pay you for what you did for someone else, because too many over time have “rested on laurels.” Employers typically have more leverage than employees in this situation. Know your power. Evaluate the dynamics of your specific situation and reject “cookie cutter” advice.
Jessica Ollenburg - Monday, November 29, 2010
- Trackback Link
- Post has no trackbacks.
Contrary to what temp services and unemployed consultants are currently blogging about, it is essential to understand that while being a leader requires consistent practice and execution, effective leadership is also both innate and learned… nature and nurture.
Make no mistake. Effective leaders need a deep understanding of the discipline, tasks and environment in which they lead. Those who believe a management degree or diploma somehow qualifies them to lead in an unfamiliar environment are sadly mistaken, likely BS’d by their college recruiter. Simultaneously, great implementers are not necessarily great leaders. The most common mistake in business is empowering the wrong leadership, either promoting implementers without leadership skills or hiring great sales artists with no leadership substance.
Good advice is hard to come by. Bad advice is abundant. With advancement the #1 workplace motivator, promotions from within not only best engage the whole team but allow leaders to have deep understanding of that which they lead. Nonetheless, self-starters and independent achievers typically do not “get” the average worker and do not know without formal leadership training how to effectively motivate and modify behavior in others. If others do not become better performers directly due to those who lead, the leaders “lift right out” as ineffective.
Jessica Ollenburg - Saturday, October 02, 2010
- Trackback Link
- Post has no trackbacks.
Some believe filling resume gaps by labeling or creating a “consulting” firm is a positive resume builder. More often than not, this adversely impacts one’s ability to be re-employed. To set oneself apart as a freelance “consultant” or company owner can be synonymous with setting oneself apart as averse to taking direction from another… a statement likely to create de-selection from employment opportunities. Top employers will also investigate the legitimate success in engagements during this “consultancy” time period on one’s resume.
When choosing to be a consultant, know beforehand it is not all glamour and glitz. A corporate career as an internal key member dedicated to one corporate environment at a time is NOT preparation for consultancy. Successful consultancy requires the proven ability to simultaneously serve multiple unique organizations through analysis and adaptation... and deep knowledge of multi-employer case studies. Serving one or a few selectively chosen organizations is not necessarily preparation for consultancy. Conversely, consultancy is not necessarily preparation to become an internal expert. Deep knowledge of that organization is the only preparation for that role.
Consultancy requires reporting to many “bosses.” It is a myth that one can succeed in consultancy without subordination. While it is true that many employers are drawn to candidates who have demonstrated the responsibility and ambition of starting a business, employers of choice will carefully screen this situation and select/de-select candidates accordingly.
If not prepared to forever risk livelihood, think twice before abandoning the safe route of remaining steadily and stably employed, creating documented successes as an employee. Embrace consultancy for what it truly is and understand that a great consultant is never “in between jobs.”
Jessica Ollenburg - Tuesday, September 14, 2010
- Trackback Link
- Post has no trackbacks.
Emerging from a recession, grabbing opportunity and surviving intense global competition, we cannot be fooled by the dangerous and misleading propaganda... "Work Smarter, Not Harder!" Statements along these lines when misinterpreted can only lead to disaster. The blueprint for success requires balance.
Agreed it can be more effective to work smart than to work hard, in most cases both are necessary. In addition, “smart” can be a matter of misinterpretation in itself. “Smart” can only truly be judged by one who is “smart” in the capacity and criteria to be evaluated. “Smart” can be ill defined. Nonetheless, "Work Smarter" should remain our dedicated target, we just need to lose the "Not Harder" component.
Through study of human work ethic, it is undeniable that many top performers equate “working hard” with “doing your best.” Anything short of doing one’s best is less than adequate. Therefore, working “hard” is always one of the goals. Where and how we channel our energies and how we balance and care for ourselves is a matter of personal choice and commitment.
Nations rich in socialism and suppressed middle class existence present global competition of both working hard and working smart in tandem. Those who wish to compete must rise to the occasion or lose the opportunity to fight another day. While the U.S. is not easily adaptable by history and infrastructure to the socialist principles which have been embraced by other nations, Americans must not think they can exist in a vacuum, especially after centuries of global involvement.
Those proven to offer judgment, accomplishment and commitment to excellence effectively draw upon the “Work Smarter, Not Harder” mantra with astute understanding that successful results require efficiency and sound judgment. These toolsets can lead to quicker, easier and more accurate positive outcomes, freeing our resources to accomplish more in the end. The mantra works best for those already working hard. Those, however, lacking necessary work commitment are adversely impacted and misled by this mantra, using it as an excuse to retract effort.
This is an essential organizational development topic to be safeguarded by employee education, policies, practices and daily performance management. The ambiguity of related remarks is polluting team members’ understanding of workplace expectations and the blueprint to security and advancement. Consider this both a “call to action” and an opportunity of betterment for organizational leaders at all levels.
Jessica Ollenburg - Saturday, January 09, 2010
- Trackback Link
- Post has no trackbacks.
Until we learn otherwise, we tend to believe others think and behave as we do. Sometimes that learning comes with a thunderbolt and leaves us with our “jaw on the ground.” Pillared on more than 30 years experience in leadership coaching to a wealth of Fortune-rated and emerging employers alike, this evidence does not falter. Consequently, it is easy to conclude that common sense does not actually exist. Coaching requires understanding motivation, capability and learning style. Without these, the ability to transform is challenged.
If you ask a self-starter why he or she is a self-starter, you shall often encounter uncertainty. According to Bob Galvin, retired Motorola chairman, self-starters and leaders can be spotted by age 14. Being a self-starter derives from intrinsic motivation (coming from within), not nearly as easily influenced as extrinsic motivation (impacted by external variables). Self-starters rarely understand those who are not self-starters, and most individuals are not self-starters. This lack of understanding creates a barrier to audience adaptation and coaching effectiveness.
Employers tend to promote top performers, usually self-starters, to leadership roles. These promotions often occur for the wrong reasons. A self-starter with the right leadership training can lead by example and deploy certain tactics, yet he or she can be challenged in ability to understand and coach those without intrinsic motivation. Leadership is a lifelong learning commitment. Without learning and adaptation to new audiences, we stunt company growth and can only hire a small percentage of the available applicant pool.
Those who study leadership recognize leadership is not a natural progression, but rather a distinctive and precise skillset. Many self-starters are completely disinterested in coaching; however, they accept the role as a title award and advancement strategy. Self-starters are often admittedly more interested in managing processes than people. Employers who create advancement ladders not necessarily tied to supervision are able to truly gauge commitment to coaching and creating transformation. Self-starters often view themselves as self-transformed and therefore may not be inclined to transform others. A supervisor, trainer or coach who fails to create transformation also fails to provide betterment to employee productivity. If the employees are not better for the supervisor’s impact, why is the supervisor retained? Assuming the talent acquisition process is doing its job, successful coaching creates transformation and improves workplace productivity through improved employee performance.
By its very definition, extrinsic motivation is volatile, affected by the employer. Motivation is, in its simplest terms, a reason. Understanding what transformed you to improved performance is a valuable toolset to transforming others. This means looking beyond intrinsic motivation. Those who were “transformed” can be highly influential and motivational success stories for others.
HRS deploys these validated studies in globally recognized assessment and kinesthetic coaching programs, serving employers in more than 100 countries plus world respected academic and certification institutions. Programs are augmented through learning style surveys having earned more than 3000 global responses to date. Typical program methodology includes leadership assessment to pinpoint coaching style, transactional/transformational effectivess and learning opportunities. This analysis is most frequently followed by audience adaptive kinesthetic workshops proven highly successful in transforming leaders, entry through CEO and BOD, into transformational coaches. Please visit AskHRS.com for more information regarding learning survey findings, validation studies, leadership assessment and kinesthetic workshop offerings.
Jessica Ollenburg - Thursday, October 15, 2009
- Trackback Link
- Post has no trackbacks.
Amidst organizational change employers deploy a wealth of employee assessments in a scheme of cost-benefit analysis. Some overspend the outcomes and then don’t even understand the data. Some sales-based assessment organizations inundate prospective clients with “high brow” tricks while brow-beating them into pretending they understand. What’s just as important as data integrity is simplified and universal buy-in… and the ability to attach meaningful cost saving action. Crazy labels and “smoke and mirrors” are not the keys to predicting success. If you don’t understand, your employees won’t either!
Employee assessment, training needs analysis, legal compliance and leadership development remain at the forefront of today's critical employer issues. Employees and leaders at all levels must be ready to adapt quickly and assume responsibilities, potentially for the first time with limited up front training. Employers can manage 5-7 figure risk with a 2-3 figure implementation before the change. This awareness continues to expand, and the demand for the right employee assessments explodes!
As a follow up to our research essay published by SHRM in 1999 and countless essays since including a Forbes interview a few years back, let’s review the changed environment. A wealth of assessment exercises is now available on the open market, and we endorse some but certainly not all of them. While HRS proprietary instruments are clearly our favorites (shameless plug), we have welcomed the most valid, reliable and meaningful instruments of other vendors into our catalog. Those we exclude and caution against are the many, many instruments that fall short of data integrity, legal compliance and assessor/assessee buy-in. For instance, validity does not exist if you cannot prove test performance directly correlates, within acceptable statistical margin of error, to workplace performance. This includes both positive and negative performance. A common pitfall here is to sample assess your top performers against the instrument and be fooled that good performance on both test and appraisal constitutes validity. That’s only part of the argument. Before assuming complete validation, test your poor performers and potentially those who weren’t selected for hire.
According to recent survey (to which 3000+ responded), advancement is the primary employee magnet and motivator, yet nearly half of incumbent managers miss at least 45% of the opportunities to be successfully transactional or transformational in leadership tactics. Self starters are proven not naturally inclined to transform others, and are therefore challenged as leaders. Incumbent call center employees are proven to miss more than half of follow through opportunities when presented with task to resolve rather than route. Nearly half of those excelling in external customer service roles underperform with internal customers, creating disharmonious team environments and unnecessary efficiency waste. In the HRSAC SR2 simulation, analytical adaptability consistently reveals itself as the most challenging criteria when employees are asked to assume a changed job condition. In short, job knowledge can hide logic, problem solving and trainability. Change for some can create disaster. Assessment results should pinpoint the “why” and the learning goals behind the performance ratings, present and future. When top performers are competing for promotion, 3rd party objectivity and buy-in are essential to ensure every top performer walks away feeling valued and empowered with tools to win that promotion next time.
What Can Be Assessed?
Leadership Styles/Tactics, Customer Service, Critical Thinking, Analytical Adaptability, Multi-Tasking, Attention to Detail, Problem Solving, Group Presentation Dynamics, Teamplayer Orientation, Time Management, Workflow Planning, Conflict Resolution, Change Advocacy, Negotiation, Persuasion, Natural Abilities and Natural Roadblocks can be measured at a minimum, and are certainly among the most popular. Some erroneously call these the “soft skills.” While there’s nothing less common than sense, I attest these are the “hard skills.” Crafted reliably, in-baskets can predict job success according to any identified job description. Skills tests are available with endless functionality.
Selecting the Right Assessment Instrument(s)
Examining validity and reliability is not as complex as it sounds. The assessment administrator who has an instrument of meaningful integrity will proudly take you through this explanation and may demo the instrument for you. Ask the following questions when choosing the instrument…
1. Inquire regarding validity and reliability studies. This includes pass-fail and/or both positive and negative ratings.
2. Investigate margin of error and resolution thereof.
3. Be convinced the instrument and its scoring report will be meaningful and gain buy-in from all parties. Be convinced the outcomes point to meaningful action.
4. Ensure the instrument’s content, delivery method and criteria support the job description for both meaningful information and legal defensibility.
On-line assessment grows in popularity due to convenience and has its important place, but for those not required to deliver such communications on the job via Internet, validity and data integrity are compromised. The testing environment should relate to the work environment. For those allowed to deliver key communications on-the-job in discussion, why force only Q&A or multiple choice based tests? Allow essay and/or conversational feedback modules. Such modules should not be computer scored. In short, the testing method and environment must be consistent with the job conditions.
In labor intensive or talent based organizations, success is largely impacted by human accuracy or error. Advancement is a key motivator, and a blueprint is essential. With the appropriate tools, employers can maneuver the right people doing the right things. Employers still promote great implementors into leadership, assuming this is the natural progression. Management is not natural progression but rather its own professional skillset and a lifelong learning commitment. The same is true for project management. For those who already buy in to the assessment center method, it remains challenging to differentiate between assessment instruments.
Having endured great cost in creating and validating precisely job specific instruments so obviously on the mark and easily understood that even assessees immediately buy-in, it’s difficult to watch others throw some meaningless crapshoot of a “smoke and mirrors” tool onto a website and pummel advertising at the public held hostage.
The best assessments gain buy-in upon inspection and discussion of scoring outcomes. The HRSAC has validated our proprietary assessments over 26 years working with hundreds of organizations from 10 to 100,000+ employees including global operations. Baselines have been established over these years for job-related criteria across countless demographics and fields. The scored analysis of the job-specific instrument reveals more precisely how behavioral traits would actually manifest themselves in a specific job setting. Probabilities for successful corporate training efforts coincide with these baselines. As interest surveys, personality profiles and integrity questionnaires continue to move out of utilization, job-predictive assessments continue to move in. Reputable assessment instruments come with validity and reliability studies, so don’t hesitate to ask! Sample reports should be proudly presented. Both employer and employee should be convinced. The key to success will be actionable findings, easy to understand with trust that ratings are accurate, job-related and meaningful in career-oriented decisions without bias. If your assessment doesn’t meet all the goals described herein, you haven’t found the right tools. Contact HRS… we’ve got them!
Jessica Ollenburg - Sunday, May 24, 2009
- Trackback Link
- Post has no trackbacks.
It’s a cliché story... one of the most common mistakes... battling for just the right amount of career confidence and self worth. Being part of a successful team or system creates a restless feeling and a need to do “bigger, better things.” The restless overconfident person leaves the successful environment and finds a path of greater resistance. Of course highly visible in the entertainment industry, the inflated “ego” can break up our favorite television series, sports team, band and far too frequently occurs (although with less celebrity status) in the workplace.
We know you can’t really succeed until you’re willing to fail, and the path of greater resistance isn’t necessarily a bad choice. Overconfidence, however, is rarely a good choice. When good things happen to those who feel “entitled,” those good things are often taken for granted and opportunities are missed. It’s really not surprising how many times overconfidence takes one down a lesser path or a path of greater resistance.
Career overconfidence takes many forms. Sometimes it bears a very unconventional appearance. Sometimes individuals have an inflated sense of entitlement or expectations, and accordingly, they inappropriately benchmark their success. Sometimes individuals underestimate the effort, work or risk tolerance required to attain success. This form of overconfidence is attached to work outcomes as opposed to talents or skills, yet it can lead to the same pitfalls.
The desire for advancement is consistently a survey leader among career magnets and motivators, yet employees too often fail to recognize opportunity or fail to invest the appropriate effort. When advancement does occur, employees often take too much credit and become overconfident with a heightened sense of workplace demand. Where employees don’t advance, they often shift blame rather than finding their own sense of accountability. After failing in one workplace, the blame-shifter often temporarily succeeds in the next. If this is due to learning, success becomes more sustainable. If this is due to scorn and determination to prove oneself right while still blame-shifting, after a brief “honeymoon period” the same barriers and original problems may re-emerge. When team members do advance, they may fail to recognize the support they’ve received, and the self-destructive cycle continues.
On the flip side, employers allow these disconnects by failing to properly distribute education on both success and failure. Inappropriate distribution of rewards, consequences and information around work outcomes is at the heart of the problem. The answer is not simple. It’s a lifelong commitment to learning and refreshing learning, supporting why the leadership assessment and learning programs are among the most popular at HRS. Even once learned, these principles are easy to overlook… and even forget.
As an individual, if you think you might be too good for your job, we recommend awareness of the “overconfident” syndrome in hope you may avoid its pitfalls. If you make a bad choice, don’t dwell on it, but please look back at it for the learning. Without learning we are destined to repeat our mistakes. Advancement is above all a product of your choices... and not necessarily which job you have but rather how you approach it.
Jessica Ollenburg - Saturday, November 08, 2008
- Trackback Link
- Post has no trackbacks.
The key to assessing motivation and predicting results of employees is to pinpoint information they may not even know of themselves. How do we do this? Carefully crafted investigations through behavior based assessment and interviewing. Why do we do this? Work ethic is detectable, complex and begins early. While successful organizational development depends upon the creating and sustaining of extrinsic (situational) motivation, an individual’s intrinsic (from within) motivation can be very difficult to change and requires an entirely different approach.
Work ethic is a core fundamental unique to every individual. It is developed over our lifetime and benefits from the earliest start possible. It begins with reaching for the infant toy rather than having that toy placed in your hand. It stems from inspiration… inspiration through need (sometimes desperation) and requires the belief set that work will influence results. Those too coddled fail to develop the need. Those not exposed to role models attaining results fail to buy-in to the outcomes. We know these fundamentals are shaped and reinforced over our lifetime.
Somewhere in the early 90’s, at a CEO Summit for which he was keynote speaker, I had the good fortune to work one-to-one with Bob Galvin, former Motorola CEO and son of founder Paul Galvin. Bob & I instantly connected on an essential finding: future leaders can be pointed out by age 14. A very controversial summation at that time, people have jumped on board to that thinking more and more. While several interpretations of “leadership” exist, the leadership we speak of here is visionary leadership and invention through inspiration, creativity, problem solving and risk taking, something for which Bob has been multiply awarded, something that stems from work ethic.
Why can we spot leaders in their early teens?
1) Intrinsic motivation starts in early childhood, part nature and a lot of nurture. Messages through parenting and life’s experiences teach a child the connection between hard work, results and rewards. It requires risk tolerance and effort. “You miss 100% of the shots you never take.” (Wayne Gretzky)
2) Success breeds success. Those who get a taste of accomplishment early can acquire a hunger for it, and of course – a confidence in the ability to attain.
3) Leadership is not the automatic progression of doing something else well. It is a distinctive skill set, orientation and career path. It is marked by characteristics which reveal themselves early in life and need nurturing. Leadership is also not a degree in management without the knowledge of how to do anything else in specific at which to lead.
4) The leadership we speak of here requires willingness to fail and go on, problem solving and a lifelong learning commitment. Each of these fundamentals are easiest developed at an early age.
5) Many scientists and psychologists believe our highest level of pure intelligence is at birth and with learning peaking during our first 2 years of life. Wisdom, education and experience fill in over time proportionate to our exposure.
Can this type of leadership emerge later in life? Yes, through dedicated choice and/or circumstances of revelation impact.
Work ethic can emerge from an intrinsic sense of responsibility and/or when we believe we can or are desperate enough to try to “control our own destiny.” Leadership is both a subset of work ethic and a combination of behavioral characteristics. We cannot lead effectively if no one is willing to follow. We should be willing to lead by example. Whether a leader of creation/invention or a leader of others, effective leadership relies upon creating inspirational ideas and/or directly inspiring others.
Effective leadership, like any career path, requires commitment. Commitment requires work ethic. Parents can be most effective in developing work ethic when they lead by example, create need (inspiration) and reinforce the rewards of work. Think about the term “street smarts” to further understand the importance of “need” in work ethic development.
Whatever the choices or extenuating circumstances of one’s life, work ethic is simply “doing your best” with sincerity and willingness of sacrifice. If education is the target, substantial learning is not reliant upon financial resources but rather the willingness to do the work to learn. People have been self-taught with very little financial resources… Abraham Lincoln, for one. If advanced education is the desire, college can be self-financed. Start them young wherever you can. Parents need to understand their role in work ethic development and they must start at infancy. If they aren’t willing to do the work, maybe they should just provide access to a proper role model and then leave the kid alone to figure it out.
Make no mistake. We know the “leave alone” approach can be over-used and backlash with other developmental problems, which is why so many attentive and well-intending parents fear and under-use it – also affecting work ethic and leadership.. We’re looking for balance, commitment, role modeling and work ethic in our parenting. We’re looking for parents to teach their kids to successfully “leave the nest” by providing supportive age-appropriate guidance, work skills and motivation. The work ethic development trail can be very telling and predictive to future workplace outcomes. It can be visible in a self-prepared resume and can be detected in a carefully crafted interview or assessment exercise. Again, most commonly, it begins in early youth.
Jessica Ollenburg - Wednesday, October 29, 2008
- Trackback Link
- Post has no trackbacks.
In coaching others and continually striving for lifelong learning & self-improvement, I’ve been in search of new ideas regarding business etiquette. Don’t get me wrong, it’s important to know when to place your napkin on your lap at a business luncheon, but I’m seeking something deeper, more meaningful and directly applicable to our everyday work lives.
As a starting point, I think a few of the biggest things that aren’t published frequently enough are getting back to the basics of 1) Respect other’s time, 2) “Do your homework” and 3) Listen & Retain. While these seem to be such “common sense” and simplistic topics, they can be easy to quickly stray from. With that, these are each things that most certainly point to etiquette in the workplace as without them, you will quickly set yourself up to be an extremely unprofessional professional.
Communication methods are very literally at our fingertips in various forms including e-mail and instant messaging. Accordingly, it’s become incredibly easy to access your co-workers & clients. While these forms are also a benefit in not needing to physically interrupt someone or cause their phone to ring – they are also easy to abuse. Most especially taking note that Generation Y has grown up with these tools, we need to train ourselves and our teams to stop, search and review before we execute.
Though I sometimes wonder if I was born in the right generation, being a Gen Y’er myself, I’ve found I do crave knowledge and, stereotypically, like instant feedback. Therefore, I recognize the importance first hand of maintaining patience and having the wisdom to see when there’s time for me to gain more of it. Requesting meetings and feedback sessions with your superiors not only shows respect for their and the company’s time – but also shows polite respect for their knowledge and experience. If you’re entitled to the information, management will be more willing to help you grow when you go about it in this regard.
Of equal importance, it’s critical to always be proactive and productive on your own. After all, isn’t that why you’re paid to be around? To relentlessly be focusing on the bottom line and your positive impact to it should be a constant driver. Especially during times of training, have you exhausted your available resources before interrupting a co-worker or superior?
If you’re going to ask a question, it’s imperative to have the courtesy of having done your homework beforehand. To be able to go to someone informing them of the resources you’ve tapped and information you’ve found shows your determination while letting them get straight to the point knowing those actions have been taken.
Furthermore, it’s vital to then listen to and retain the information you’re given. As employers constantly strive to attract, listen to, and retain their employees – so should we listen to and retain the assistance provided us to maximize the company’s investment and continue to be an asset to it.
In the long run, needing to know which fork to use becomes irrelevant when you’re not even invited to the lunch with a client - because you can’t wow ‘em in the office. Your internal team should be your #1 clients! Get their positive attention, look out for the company’s bottom line, and watch your own grow along with your new opportunities!
Blog Article by Jodi Rasmussen, HRS Assistant Director of Professional Service Operations!
The Team At HRS - Sunday, September 14, 2008
- Trackback Link
- Post has no trackbacks.