When I became a civil servant many years ago someone asked me did I understand what that meant? I probably looked like a deer in the headlights and muttered something like, "Well..., I work for the State (of California)". I was immediately corrected and told that as a civil servant I was "held to a higher standard because I was responsible for protecting the pubic's trust". Gulp -- wow, that sounded like a lot of responsibility for someone just working for the State...but that thought was always in the back of my mind throughout my state career.
If it is not civil servants...who is looking out for the public, and insuring that their tax and other dollars are spent wisely? We continually read about people and departments that pretty much do their own thing. The Department of Parks and Recreation debacle -- hiding money, while begging non-profits and localities to support their local parks hardly qualifies as "protecting the public's trust". Nor does cashing out vacation time, when there is no announced vacation buy back program. And please do not tell me that those 50+ employees including the Deputy Director of Administration did not understand that a yellow sticky note does not qualify as an official form which one would normally use to request vacation buy back. Really??? And let's not forget CalTRANS that can't seem to inspect their bridges and overpasses correctly -- boy that's another confidence builder for the public. No wonder the public is so outraged about state worker salaries and pensions -- it is just too much!!
Now days in State Government the only two words that matter are -- money and me. Many people are hired at all levels of government who do not have a clue of what they are doing. They do not have the requisite background or knowledge to performs their jobs...but they sit shucking and jiving their way to sometimes a sizable paycheck. Many employees have no knowledge of the basics of state government; laws, rules and procedures or protocols...they just make it up as they go. So you have the blind (sometimes rather innocently -- sometimes willfully) leading the blind.
The mass exodus of state employees retiring over the past 4-5 years has left a huge void -- we were the ones that were good stewards of the public trust. We knew the rules, and abided by them. There used to be penalties for not abiding by the rules -- counseling memos, letters of reprimand and if you were a really bad actor, you could get fired. Auditors were everywhere -- at the State Controller's Office monitoring the expenditures of departments, their travel claims, and contracts. Department of Personnel Administration/State Personnel Board monitored the hiring and classifications systems--write-ups and justifications had to be submitted and approved. And the biggest gun in State Government was the Department of Finance-- they controlled departments' budget expenditures and practically knew every dollar that was spent, every position that was added and every upgrade that was allowed. There was no having the Controller's numbers differ from the department's numbers....if there was a difference, then there better be a good explanation.
Now there are no longer any real control agencies helping to protect the public's trust. They seem to exist only on paper, but not in actually. No one seems to take responsibility for anything and there is not any accountability. And very worst part is that people who are in positions that should care and they get paid to care, DO NOT. The State of California is a a miniature version of Penn State. No one wants to speak up for fear of making the wrong person look bad and then being forced out of their jobs -- be it civil servants or political appointees.
As much as I like progress, I am all for going back to those "good old days" of State Government, (I can't believe I am saying this as I dreaded all of those endless write-ups, etc.) wherein everything had to be justified to the above mentioned "control" agencies. I firmly believe that is the only way that State Government can begin to function in any meaningful way again.
It starts with hiring competent people at those control agencies, holding them accountable for doing their jobs, and they in turn make all of the departments and their employees accountable. It is a trickle down effect which actually worked very well for many years.
Until that happens, there will not be anyone held to a higher standard and there will not be many "protecting the public's trust".
Friday, August 10, 2012
Monday, June 25, 2012
Vol. 2.10 Kindness Matters
The lack of caring or kindness is endemic -- it exists in politics, workplaces, schools, and in our homes. If one acts out of kindness oftentimes they are accused of being "soft"? I beg to differ, if employees are treated with kindness, trust will ensue. If trust ensues, then employees know that you have their back.
Colin Powell in his book "It Worked for Me", tells a story about parking lot attendants at the Pentagon that he had befriended. Since there were more cars than spaces, he asked them how they decided who got their car first. He wrote, "They gave each other knowing looks and little smiles. "Mr. Secretary,"...it goes like this, when you drive in, if you lower the window, look out, smile, or know our name, you're number one to get out. But if you look straight ahead, don't show that you see us or that we are doing something for you, well you are likely to be one of the last to get out". Employees who are ignored or worst yet, treated badly, will always find a way to get back at their employer.
A case in point was published in the Sacramento Bee on May 27, 2012 regarding a correctional officer, Sandra Knott. Her story is a tragic one at best. In July 2003 she was diagnosed with cancer. While going through chemotherapy she was placed on "light duty" in an office setting. Her cancer went into remission; she went back to correctional officer duties, but then the cancer recurred. This time under a different warden, when she requested light duty she was denied and told that she needed to" fulfill the essential functions of her job". She was offered other positions that would require walking great distances and being on her feet, but she was clearly unable to perform those duties.
Fellow employees in the meantime were donating their time to her in order to keep her on payroll. She decided to take medical leave but she continued, however, to look for other positions within Corrections and sent a query to Jan O'Neill, chief of the Office of Employee Wellness. O'Neill's response was very succinct: "Your letter makes it sound like your need for medical treatment is of concern to me, she wrote. "My only concern is your ability or inability to safely perform the essential functions of your peace officer classification." AMAZING!!
Needless to say, the Department of Corrections is now settling the case for nearly $1 million dollars in damages and is working with her towards a settlement as she is about 15 months short from being able to retire. Her stage 4 cancer continues, so it remains to be seen whether she will even make it to retirement.
A case in point was published in the Sacramento Bee on May 27, 2012 regarding a correctional officer, Sandra Knott. Her story is a tragic one at best. In July 2003 she was diagnosed with cancer. While going through chemotherapy she was placed on "light duty" in an office setting. Her cancer went into remission; she went back to correctional officer duties, but then the cancer recurred. This time under a different warden, when she requested light duty she was denied and told that she needed to" fulfill the essential functions of her job". She was offered other positions that would require walking great distances and being on her feet, but she was clearly unable to perform those duties.
Fellow employees in the meantime were donating their time to her in order to keep her on payroll. She decided to take medical leave but she continued, however, to look for other positions within Corrections and sent a query to Jan O'Neill, chief of the Office of Employee Wellness. O'Neill's response was very succinct: "Your letter makes it sound like your need for medical treatment is of concern to me, she wrote. "My only concern is your ability or inability to safely perform the essential functions of your peace officer classification." AMAZING!!
Needless to say, the Department of Corrections is now settling the case for nearly $1 million dollars in damages and is working with her towards a settlement as she is about 15 months short from being able to retire. Her stage 4 cancer continues, so it remains to be seen whether she will even make it to retirement.
Such lack of compassion or kindness on behalf of an employer is telling. Officials forget the human condition, and think that employees are widgets to be told what to do and when to do it. They also forget the basic of tenet contained in most religions far and wide -- treat others as you would want to be treated.
Kindness matters, especially at the very top level. Employees observe their leadership and decide what kind of culture exists. And if there is trust in top management and difficult decisions need to be made, employees will know that leaders had their best interests at heart.
Colin Powell goes on to say that "every person in an organization has value and wants that value to be recognized. Everyone needs appreciation and reinforcement. Taking care of employees is perhaps the best form of kindness".
Great words of wisdom from Secretary Colin Powell....
Kindness matters, especially at the very top level. Employees observe their leadership and decide what kind of culture exists. And if there is trust in top management and difficult decisions need to be made, employees will know that leaders had their best interests at heart.
Colin Powell goes on to say that "every person in an organization has value and wants that value to be recognized. Everyone needs appreciation and reinforcement. Taking care of employees is perhaps the best form of kindness".
Great words of wisdom from Secretary Colin Powell....
Sunday, May 27, 2012
Vol. 2.9 Are We Progressing or Regressing?
When I started work with the great State of California over forty years ago, there was a structure and an accepted way of doing things. Granted it was a bit rigid, but at least most everyone played by the same set of rules. I began my "illustrious" career at the Department of Motor Vehicles. It was not a progressive place; employees had to be in their seats and ready to work when the bell rang. It was the same at quitting time -- folks would line up at the door waiting for the bell to ring so they could dash down the stairs or be the first one to the elevator in order to exit the building.
There were no unions but there were dress codes. Women wore skirts and dresses -- men wore slacks. No jeans were allowed and women could not wear pants until 1970 when only pant suits were allowed. If you were pregnant and showing, my second state employer, forced women to take leave for their "period of confinement".
Promotions were hard to come by. My third state employer told me I was well qualified but it would take ten year before I would be promoted because others were waiting ahead of me. There were rules, lots of them, but those who administered those rigid rules showed respect for employees and employees were respectful right back. We all understood the rules of "engagement" and most worked within them.
The fourth employer, Youth Authority (which no longer exists) was actually a very progressive place for the late 1970's. They instituted "core hours". Everybody was expected to work an eight hour day, but they HAD to be at work between the hours of 9:00 am and 3:00 pm -- meetings were scheduled during those hours. It made life so much easier. It all worked really well.
With the subsequent advent of unions and contracts, alternative work week schedules were allowed. Employers and employers made them work. People were happy. Of late more state employers, without providing any explanation, have decided to curtail those flexible working hours...And now Governor Brown wants to institute a 9.5 hour, 4 day a week work schedule.
Does anyone care about what works for employees? Life still happens. Since my early days in state government, (long ago and far away) the roadways have become congested; parking expensive, and children have many more organized activities. Life has grown more complicated--then why has everything become more rigid rather than more flexible? Where is the work/life balance? Are we regressing or progressing?
There were no unions but there were dress codes. Women wore skirts and dresses -- men wore slacks. No jeans were allowed and women could not wear pants until 1970 when only pant suits were allowed. If you were pregnant and showing, my second state employer, forced women to take leave for their "period of confinement".
Promotions were hard to come by. My third state employer told me I was well qualified but it would take ten year before I would be promoted because others were waiting ahead of me. There were rules, lots of them, but those who administered those rigid rules showed respect for employees and employees were respectful right back. We all understood the rules of "engagement" and most worked within them.
The fourth employer, Youth Authority (which no longer exists) was actually a very progressive place for the late 1970's. They instituted "core hours". Everybody was expected to work an eight hour day, but they HAD to be at work between the hours of 9:00 am and 3:00 pm -- meetings were scheduled during those hours. It made life so much easier. It all worked really well.
With the subsequent advent of unions and contracts, alternative work week schedules were allowed. Employers and employers made them work. People were happy. Of late more state employers, without providing any explanation, have decided to curtail those flexible working hours...And now Governor Brown wants to institute a 9.5 hour, 4 day a week work schedule.
Does anyone care about what works for employees? Life still happens. Since my early days in state government, (long ago and far away) the roadways have become congested; parking expensive, and children have many more organized activities. Life has grown more complicated--then why has everything become more rigid rather than more flexible? Where is the work/life balance? Are we regressing or progressing?
Friday, April 20, 2012
Vol. 2.8 "The Better Angels of our Nature"
Those were the closing words used by Abraham Lincoln in his first inaugural speech in 1861 when the country was divided over the slavery issue. It seems appropriate at this moment, when our country is torn by ideologies, to talk about those "angels". If we ever needed to be using the better part of our natures, it would be now.
I believe that everyone of us has a good side to our nature and an equally dark side. Most of the time, the good nature is the only one that is on display -- we try to keep that other side to ourselves. However, it seems more and more that the dark side of our natures is on exhibit daily -- our elected officials, our government officials, our corporate executives and on and on.
And it is being allowed...by all of us. We expected our elected officials to be watching out our best interests, we expected that federal regulators would be regulating all of the industries that they were supposed to -- financial institutions, off shore oil rigs, etc...now even those attached to the secret service are no longer regulating themselves...there are no watchdogs anymore looking at for anything but their own best interests.
No one wants to step up and tell the truth and hold those accountable for their bad acts...only when the media glare is so intense that they have to...and with as many scandals happening these days, it is easy for the rest to just slip way unnoticed. If overseers were to really tell the truth about much of anything they would be forced out of their jobs and probably black listed -- their livelihoods threatened....unless they could score a cushy job with a big fat pay check as a reward for looking the other away when they were supposed to be paying attention.
I think it is about time for me to say this loud and clear, folks, WE ARE ON OUR OWN. I don't think that we can rely on anyone to be "fair and balanced" as is said by Fox News on the radio. It is incumbent on all of us to be and demand "those better angels of our nature", if we are going to mend and heal this country. And we must demand it of ourselves too. Perhaps many of those people in positions of power may have a reason that they operate from their dark "shadow" side...it just may be in their nature to do so.
That's a heavy concept....more on that subject soon.
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
Vol. 2.7 Culture Matters More Than Strategy
Like I have not said this enough, but yes, I am going to say it again -- PEOPLE MATTER!! In the workplace or your own personal life -- people are the most important ingredient. Companies spend boatloads of money developing strategies -- from the "10,000 foot level, down to the granular level", etc. whatever...but the point they keep missing and do not value, is that without the workforce (people) behind them, it will never work -- they cannot be successful.
Strategy is rational and culture is emotional. Which is why so many leaders ignore it -- they undervalue the fact that employees (their greatest asset) are living, breathing human beings with emotions. And if employees are engaged on an emotional level, and feel respected, valued and part of a team working toward a noble goal, those employees will work their tails off for that leader and organization -- why?? because they know that someone sees and cares about them and they will in turn care also--about the leader, organization and its mission.
Shawn Parr*, published in Fast Company, Inc., states that "Culture is a balanced blend of human psychology, attitudes, actions and beliefs that combined create either pleasure or pain, serious momentum or miserable stagnation". He further writes that "Your people either create or undermine value, cultivate or kill relationships, drive or reduce success. A well-conceived strategy living in the hands of unhappy, misdirected, misinformed people is a sure way to a slow and painful death. There is no comparison to being in the hearts and hands of energized, informed, and motivated people".
Lastly, he states that "Culture is the field on which the strategy plays. A vibrant and functional culture is like a blanket that embraces, protects, and nurtures the strategy. A company without a strategy lacks direction. A strategy without a culture that understands or embraces it is like a sport team without a spirit".
I could not have said it better. If there is no spirit -- no one wins. Caring (spirit) infused from the top down is what makes the difference. Remember "Friday Night Lights -- Clear Eyes, Full Heart, Can't Lose"? That's what I was talking about...
Strategy is rational and culture is emotional. Which is why so many leaders ignore it -- they undervalue the fact that employees (their greatest asset) are living, breathing human beings with emotions. And if employees are engaged on an emotional level, and feel respected, valued and part of a team working toward a noble goal, those employees will work their tails off for that leader and organization -- why?? because they know that someone sees and cares about them and they will in turn care also--about the leader, organization and its mission.
Shawn Parr*, published in Fast Company, Inc., states that "Culture is a balanced blend of human psychology, attitudes, actions and beliefs that combined create either pleasure or pain, serious momentum or miserable stagnation". He further writes that "Your people either create or undermine value, cultivate or kill relationships, drive or reduce success. A well-conceived strategy living in the hands of unhappy, misdirected, misinformed people is a sure way to a slow and painful death. There is no comparison to being in the hearts and hands of energized, informed, and motivated people".
Lastly, he states that "Culture is the field on which the strategy plays. A vibrant and functional culture is like a blanket that embraces, protects, and nurtures the strategy. A company without a strategy lacks direction. A strategy without a culture that understands or embraces it is like a sport team without a spirit".
I could not have said it better. If there is no spirit -- no one wins. Caring (spirit) infused from the top down is what makes the difference. Remember "Friday Night Lights -- Clear Eyes, Full Heart, Can't Lose"? That's what I was talking about...
*The Guvner & CEO of Bulldog Drummond, an
innovation and design consultancy headquartered in San Diego .
Clients have included Starbucks, Jack in the Box, MTV, Nestle,
Pinkberry, Virgin, Disney, Nike, Mattel, Heineken and The Michael J. Fox Foundation for
Parkinson’s, among others.
Monday, March 26, 2012
Vol. 2.6 Blame-Storming
A few years ago there was a commercial on the television which showed a group of executives sitting around a conference table. They were holding a "blame-storming" session. Obviously something had gone terribly wrong at their company and since the executives were not going to accept any blame for their own failures, they needed a plausible scapegoat. Thus, they were looking at employees and trying to decide who would make the best victim. Once they decided on the best candidate, then they needed a good story. They needed to create a logical explanation as to why it was this employee's error and not their own...and they needed to tell the story as often as possible so everyone in the organization knew it.
I have never forgotten that commercial, although I only saw it a couple of times. It seems more real today than it did those couple years ago -- it was just a parody then, but today it is reality.
Hasn't blaming become part of the American way of doing business? After a day of campaigning, each political party has their paid strategists research and come up with plausible "sound bites" to blame the other candidate or party for something that may not even be true -- if it sounds good and if it is salacious enough, they believe the voters will believe it -- the truth does not matter.
From what I hear and experience, this is not too far removed from what happens in the workplace today. A reader of my last blog pointed out that he does not believe this is the case everywhere -- and I am not suggesting that it does happen everywhere, but it seems to be prevalent enough to warrant being talked about.
How can employees feel part of an organization when someone in a position of power blames them for something that went wrong that was beyond the employee's control. Maybe they were involved, but they were not he decision maker; maybe they were only involved tangentially, but the "story" that is told that so and so did blah, blah, blah, and places them as the one responsible for the debacle. If a leader says it enough times with enough conviction, they begin to believe their own stories and other employees will believe it also. Suddenly it IS the truth and that employee is in deep kimchi through no fault of their own.
Can an organization thrive when this happens? I think not, and I hope that you think that too. It is impossible to have a successful company, organization, or government, until we start hearing the truth, and holding those leaders accountable for their own bad decisions.
Only when the bullying and the blame games stop, will we begin to heal and get back to the real business of government or running a company. We need to start rebuilding the culture inside of each of these entities. It is not an easy thing, but it is a very doable thing...and it needs to start now.
I have never forgotten that commercial, although I only saw it a couple of times. It seems more real today than it did those couple years ago -- it was just a parody then, but today it is reality.
Hasn't blaming become part of the American way of doing business? After a day of campaigning, each political party has their paid strategists research and come up with plausible "sound bites" to blame the other candidate or party for something that may not even be true -- if it sounds good and if it is salacious enough, they believe the voters will believe it -- the truth does not matter.
From what I hear and experience, this is not too far removed from what happens in the workplace today. A reader of my last blog pointed out that he does not believe this is the case everywhere -- and I am not suggesting that it does happen everywhere, but it seems to be prevalent enough to warrant being talked about.
How can employees feel part of an organization when someone in a position of power blames them for something that went wrong that was beyond the employee's control. Maybe they were involved, but they were not he decision maker; maybe they were only involved tangentially, but the "story" that is told that so and so did blah, blah, blah, and places them as the one responsible for the debacle. If a leader says it enough times with enough conviction, they begin to believe their own stories and other employees will believe it also. Suddenly it IS the truth and that employee is in deep kimchi through no fault of their own.
Can an organization thrive when this happens? I think not, and I hope that you think that too. It is impossible to have a successful company, organization, or government, until we start hearing the truth, and holding those leaders accountable for their own bad decisions.
Only when the bullying and the blame games stop, will we begin to heal and get back to the real business of government or running a company. We need to start rebuilding the culture inside of each of these entities. It is not an easy thing, but it is a very doable thing...and it needs to start now.
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Vol. 2.5 Workers are in a Catch 22 Situation
It is my hope that many of you out there are happy in you work life. I hope that you have a fulfilling job that gives you many psychological rewards. If you are, I need to meet you. I either hang with the wrong crowd or that happy fulfilled crowd keeps shrinking and eludes me.
I think that I get around quite a bit even though I am retired, but I do not talk to anyone -- not one single person, who is happy in their job. They may like the work that they do but not the office politics -- or being told to execute really bad decisions. The thought of an employee asking a question to try and understand a decision is next to heresy.
Yet employees want to be included in discussions, they want to think that their opinion counts, and they want to contribute to their workplace in a positive way. Employees used to be hired because they had knowledge, skills and abilities, therefore having a very good chance of performing the duties of the position for which they were hired. Those days appear to be long gone.
It is no wonder that most state exams are now done on-line -- just a point and click exercise. Anyone could take an exam and lie about everything on it...heck your dog could take it and the dog could get the top score. In fact the percentage of top scores is around 90%, unlike any Bell curve that I have ever seen. If someone in state government has the hiring power, they can bring in anyone that they want...their friends, family, children -- all with no verification of anything on their application or the supposed "exam". One day you are unemployed and practically the next day you can be employed by the state (assuming there are openings).
This practice started during Governor Wilson's administration and was short lived because it was deemed to be a very ineffective way of hiring the best talent for state government. Potential employees were not being vetted in any meaningful way. Apparently that logic no longer applies, and realistically it may not matter.
The sad fact is that there still exist very smart, and skilled employees in the workplace. But they are not allowed to offer their advise or ask questions. Their job, if it were to be described correctly on their duty statements or position descriptions would simply say "execute whatever the boss wants ". If they offer an opinion, ask a question or have the audacity to suggest a direction, they are accused of not being a team player, or taking over a situation and excluding others; if they sit back and don't engage, they re told they are not contributing.
The rules of engagement in the work place have changed. Is it any wonder so many employees are so unhappy? They do not know whether to zig or zag. Employees are caught in a Catch 22 situation.
I think that I get around quite a bit even though I am retired, but I do not talk to anyone -- not one single person, who is happy in their job. They may like the work that they do but not the office politics -- or being told to execute really bad decisions. The thought of an employee asking a question to try and understand a decision is next to heresy.
Yet employees want to be included in discussions, they want to think that their opinion counts, and they want to contribute to their workplace in a positive way. Employees used to be hired because they had knowledge, skills and abilities, therefore having a very good chance of performing the duties of the position for which they were hired. Those days appear to be long gone.
It is no wonder that most state exams are now done on-line -- just a point and click exercise. Anyone could take an exam and lie about everything on it...heck your dog could take it and the dog could get the top score. In fact the percentage of top scores is around 90%, unlike any Bell curve that I have ever seen. If someone in state government has the hiring power, they can bring in anyone that they want...their friends, family, children -- all with no verification of anything on their application or the supposed "exam". One day you are unemployed and practically the next day you can be employed by the state (assuming there are openings).
This practice started during Governor Wilson's administration and was short lived because it was deemed to be a very ineffective way of hiring the best talent for state government. Potential employees were not being vetted in any meaningful way. Apparently that logic no longer applies, and realistically it may not matter.
The sad fact is that there still exist very smart, and skilled employees in the workplace. But they are not allowed to offer their advise or ask questions. Their job, if it were to be described correctly on their duty statements or position descriptions would simply say "execute whatever the boss wants ". If they offer an opinion, ask a question or have the audacity to suggest a direction, they are accused of not being a team player, or taking over a situation and excluding others; if they sit back and don't engage, they re told they are not contributing.
The rules of engagement in the work place have changed. Is it any wonder so many employees are so unhappy? They do not know whether to zig or zag. Employees are caught in a Catch 22 situation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)