Continue reading »]]>

Have you heard the story about the gal who was fired from her full-time job as a reporter because she didn’t disclose to her employer that she was a part-time exotic dancer, er stripper?

She’s filed a complaint with the EEOC and is suing her former employer for gender discrimination.  When I first heard it on the news, my first thought was, “Good for her, I hope she kicks their ass and wins!”  After all, she’s a reporter, not a nun.  She’s earned a Master’s in Journalism and was paying off her debt for her education — that ultimately benefits her employer.

Perhaps she was discovered by her stripper blog that had a photo and her real name on it.  Or maybe someone she works with happened to see her while she was on the clock at her part-time gig.

Back to the case.

If her employer argues they had a “no moonlighting” policy and employees were obligated to disclose where they worked, I wonder if she would have been fired if she was working at a pizza joint or the local gym.  I’m thinking they would have turned a blind eye provided it wasn’t affecting her work by day.  The general purpose of this policy is usually two-fold: employers want to make sure their employees aren’t working for a competitor and they also don’t want their employees’ work to suffer if they’re physically exhausted from working a second job.

But what really gets under my skin is something different.

The reason I want this gal to win this case is because a message needs to be sent to employers to get off their high, self-righteous horses and respect the private lives of their employees.  No laws are being broken.  Get out of the lives of people’s Facebook pages, asking for social media passwords, political beliefs, religious beliefs, sexual orientation preferences and yes, part time jobs.

It’s none of anyone’s business.

If an employee fails to perform, then step in.  Employees are people, just like you, and have a right to a life outside of work.

As an aside:  This gal’s attorney, Gloria Allred says, “Most exotic dancers are female, and therefore to terminate an employee because they had previously been an exotic dancer would have an adverse impact on women, since it is a female-dominated occupation.”

I agree with that and I still want her to win.

Photo credit: alamy

Continue reading »]]> It’s common sense (well it should be anyway!) that job seekers shouldn’t bad mouth former employers on a job interview.  However, when you’re looking for a new job, there’s always a good reason for it and you should be honest — in a professional way.  I’m not talking about getting into an hour-long drama explaining how tired you are of the office politics.

I read an article where the author stated to use the following reasons to explain why you want to leave your current employer:

1. Seeking new opportunities
2. Looking for more responsibility
3. Interested in career advancement

Yes, these are practical reasons to look for a new gig but they’ve been around FOREVER and are ultra cliché!  Everyone who doesn’t want to talk about the fact that they hate their boss will use one of these reasons.

If one of these reasons are legit for you, skip the cliché and give an example.  For instance, share a relevant and measurable work accomplishment that explains why you’re ready to tackle new responsibilities and how it will add value to an organization.

Unless the person interviewing you has just fallen from a turnip truck or is on their first day of the job, they’ll dig for more information to learn more about why you want to make a change.  It’s best if it comes directly from you instead of having the interviewer make an incorrect assumption about you or your work.

And what if you really are leaving your job because you hate your boss.  Is it best to be honest?  Well, we’d like to think we could be because there is a laundry list of bad bosses out there.  But, like it or not, perception is reality and yes, you will be judged way too harshly if you were that honest.  In this case, my suggestion would be to think of the second most important reason you want to leave your position and go from there.

The most important thing to remember is to be your real, unscripted self.

Photo credit: stock.xchng

Continue reading »]]> Check out this infographic on Women @ Work from the MBA@UNC Online MBA program at UNC.  Women still have a long way to go before we achieve equality in business leadership.

The upside is:

• Women-owned, venture-backed companies have 12% higher revenues
• Women are starting their own businesses at 1.5 times the national average

The downside is:

• Only 25% of the tech industry is women
• Only 16% of US companies have women on their boards
• Women entrepreneurs begin with about 1/8 of the funding of male-owned ventures

Via MBA@UNC MBA Online & Women 2.0

Continue reading »]]> My fiancé, John, is a business owner and when I talk about social media he shakes his head and makes a face like I’m describing a bad rash.  Neither John or the business that he runs can be found on LinkedIn.  Forget Twitter or Facebook.  Hell, if John had his way, he wouldn’t even use email — he hates it.  John prefers phone calls and handshakes.

I shared this with someone who was preaching about the importance of a Klout score as a business owner and he emphatically told me that John was “missing the boat”.  Really?

When relationships are built and maintained based on ongoing exceptional service, and those relationships turn into cash…where exactly is that missing boat going?  When the business grows from referrals due to that same great service…what’s the name of that boat?  When you’re so busy with new business and the phone’s ringing off the hook…what boat?

I like social media and the folks I’ve met as a result but the one thing that I’ve learned is that many business owners haven’t heard of Klout, don’t care about Twitter or even LinkedIn.  Know why?  Because they’re running a business and don’t have time for social media!

So no, I’m not sold on the fact that being active on social media will grow a business (well, unless the business is social media).  While I believe social media can offer exposure to opportunities, it’s still up to you, the living, breathing, smiling human to turn that opportunity into income by establishing and building the relationship.  Social media won’t dial the phone for you.  I gotta admit that when I see folks spending all day tweeting, Facebooking and touting their Klout score, I have trouble believing they’re making any money — but they’ll tell you differently!

People won’t hire you or pay you for your knowledge or service because of what you tweet or blog about.  That’s not what they’re buying.  When folks buy your product or service, they’re buying you — the person they’ve met.  People invest in real, smiling people who want to make the effort to build and nurture long-term relationships that are mutually beneficial.

Isn’t building successful and long-term relationships worth the time investment?

Continue reading »]]> While reading my LinkedIn updates, a discussion grabbed my attention.  An HR professional (15 years of experience) was asking peers for ideas on how to offer preferred parking spots to employees via a lottery.

Really?  My immediate thought was I couldn’t believe someone was spending time crowdsourcing this and that they actually needed help figuring this out!   This is exactly the stuff that keeps the negative stigma about the uselessness of HR sticking.

So I threw it up on Facebook for some opinions.

Several colleagues and of course there were a few funnies — like maybe she should bring in a third-party lottery expert or do an employee survey on parking.

There were a few comments that led to a consensus that perhaps “perk management” was a part of her role.  If that’s the case, why isn’t it incorporated into the company’s total rewards program and handled once a year?

The troubling part of this was that an HR veteran is spending an inordinate amount of time trying to figure out a process for “perk management.”  This is exactly the stuff that sets HR back 20 years to the days of being a taskmaster for “fluff management”.

What do you think?

Continue reading »]]> This is the final post, 3 of 3 about why companies should eliminate the traditional annual performance review, what the alternatives are and how to do it successfully.

We talked about why annual performance reviews are destructive and how to do them right when we start doing them more frequently.  Do you know the sure fire way for performance reviews to be objective?

Well it’s not the traditional form that managers complete.  Being objective on traditional performance review forms is not possible, period.  Think about some of the categories on your performance review form?  You’ll see categories like “initiative” and “adaptability”.  Just exactly how do we speak about these topics objectively?

You can’t.  You can’t because what you think the meaning of initiative and adaptability may not be what others think.  You may have an employee who thinks that getting out of bed is a huge step in taking initiative!  Objectivity and human nature often cancel each other out.

Here’s where old school is really new school.  Remember our old friend SMART goals?  That’s really the magic bullet for objectivity.

When we’re not basing our evaluation on the completion of agreed upon goals, bad things can happen.  Here’s a story for you:

I worked with a manager named Bob.  He had a team of 5 and became a manager due to what I like to call “battlefield promotion” which is when his manager resigned, Bob had the most seniority so boom! — Bob gets to be manager.

Bob was happy with his new gig and had a great relationship with his team from working with them and figured that would give him an edge.  Let’s fast forward to review time.

He has Joe working for him who hasn’t quite been making it happen.  Bob’s running interference between the others on his team and Joe because everyone else has been picking up Joe’s slack.  Well since Bob is buds with Joe, he also knows that Joe is having some financial stress and personal issues at home.  He doesn’t want Joe’s review to reflect a poor salary increase so Bob starts to pick up Joe’s slack…

Now this is a total lose-lose situation.  We have Joe who is losing by not having productive and frequent sit downs to have an opportunity to turn his performance around…we have Bob who’s losing because he’s doing his own job, and covering for Joe.  The rest of the team is losing because they’re having to work their tails off to pick up the slack.  That’s a big mess that could have been avoided had Bob and Joe agreed to objective goals and had frequent discussions about Joe’s progress against those goals.

Another bad thing that can happen is what I call the sin of recency.  Maybe you’ve seen this happen:

A few months before it’s time for the performance review, employees who might normally be average will kick it into high gear all of a sudden because they know their manager isn’t going to remember those blunders from 8 months ago.  And it’s a fact that managers will only retain a few months back of memory … So what’s recent is evaluated, and what’s less recent is forgotten.

This is frustrating and demoralizing for employees, and helps even more to make the performance review process completely worthless for everyone.

Then, one more twist…

When you link the annual performance review discussion with the discussion about pay increases, which, in the employee’s mind is:  “do I get a raise and how much”, then neither of those conversations will have the impact they should.

But when you have frequent conversations all year long, based on how the employee is doing against an agreed upon set of goals, then you can have the compensation discussion all by itself, and since the employee already knows how they’ve been doing, it’s a much smoother and productive conversation.

Apply this to your organization.  If you  have a “once a year” performance appraisal system:

• How can you incorporate goal setting and more frequent performance discussions?
• Who would you have to influence?  What kind of training and development would your managers need?
• How could you ensure that this is a culture shift, and not just a “flavor of the month new program”?
• How can you skill your managers to depersonalize the conversations?
• How can you unlink the performance and compensation conversations?

I hope that these posts have given you food for thought.  Providing feedback to our employees is essential.  But not if we’re not doing it right.  Doing it right is a relative term — it’s what’s best for your organization — not for all organizations.

Would you like to learn how you can implement an effective performance management program in your company?  Let’s talk!

Continue reading »]]> This is part 2 of a 3-part post on why companies should eliminate the traditional annual performance review, what the alternatives are and how to do it successfully.

My first post highlighted why the annual performance review process is broken and why feedback should be given often — monthly or every two weeks — whatever works for the organization.  It shouldn’t be overcomplicated with a bunch of forms and boxes to check off.

The discussion about performance should not take place at the same time we talk about pay raises either — unlink those conversations pronto!  Business leaders, managers and HR needs to recondition their thinking and simplify this process.

The process is easy but can get screwed up if it’s not done right.  I’m going to share a valuable tool that managers can use immediately to make this successful.

I’m sure you’ve heard the expression:  “It’s not what you say but how you say it.”  Now picture yourself in your own performance review meeting with your manager.  You keep hearing “you”, “you”, “you” throughout much of the conversation.  How do you react?  How much of the conversation are you actually hearing?  How productive is this meeting for both you and your manager?

Whenever we speak to someone in the first person and use the word “you” I guarantee that that person is not fully listening.  Instead the listener is gearing up for how they’re going to respond and what they’re going to say next.  When we talk in the first person to someone, especially if they’re already anxious, they’re going to become defensive – it’s human nature.  And when this happens, the listener isn’t going to hear or retain anything else that’s being said.

I’d go to Vegas and bet that most managers don’t do this right — heck, most people don’t do this right.

When we’re having these one on one meetings, do this:  picture the topic as an inanimate object sitting in front of you.  This allows us to remove emotion from the conversation to make it more objective.  When we keep the focus on the topic, we’re not pointing any fingers.  Here’s an example:

Don’t:   “You missed 3 deadlines last month.”

Do:  “3 deadlines were missed last month.”

See the difference?  Give it a shot and use this third person method the next time you’re having a conversation that you need to depersonalize.

Don’t forget styles.  These meetings are best when they’re casual and in a conversational style.  Sit side by side, have the meeting over coffee or lunch.  But avoid the boss sitting behind the desk scene.

Let’s recap:

• Unlink the performance discussion from the discussion about any pay increase.  (More on that in my final post!)
• When we have these meetings more frequently, both managers and employees will get used to discussing work issues – even tough ones become easier to discuss.
• When we use the third person, we instantly depersonalize the conversation – which means the meeting is productive and the employee will hear the message.  AND…as a bonus, now we’re being objective…which really was our goal all along.

Stay tuned — the final post will cover what we need and want in performance reviews — how to be objective!

Continue reading »]]>

This is a 3-part post.  I’m going to share why the annual  performance review process needs to go away forever and what should be done instead.  I’ll also share how to do it right and be objective — what a concept!  I hope you enjoy it.

It’s 3 pm on a Thursday afternoon and Andrea goes into her manager’s office for her annual performance review that she’s been dreading it all week.  She knows the drill — her manager will ask her to read the evaluation form he completed and then he’ll finally get around to telling her what she really wants to know — which is how much her raise is.

She leaves frustrated just like every year.  She doesn’t think her manager has any idea of what she’d contributed all year, so how could he have accurately rated it?  Of course she’ll wait another year to discuss her performance – that is unless she screws something up – then she’ll definitely hear about that!

This is happening way too often and it’s creating employees who are disheartened, disengaged, and waiting for the economy to pick up so that they can find other jobs.

Traditional performance reviews – the way most companies do them are broken!  They don’t work and they cause more harm than good.

Here’s why.  In most performance appraisal and review systems,  several things happen…

First, we try to fit the multi-faceted, multi-dimensional, complex human being into a predetermined scoring box on the traditional performance appraisal form – it’s destructive.

Then, we have to take into account that we have imperfect human beings ranking the performance of other imperfect human beings on a piece of paper. What are the chances of that going well?

Then, to top it all off, we tie in the conversation about whether they’re getting a raise or not….

And really…this is and has been a recipe for disaster.

We need to turn this entire experience into a verb — an ongoing action instead of a noun, a project that sits on a shelf and comes out once a year.  If we want employees to get the most of their performance reviews, there has to be an ongoing stream of information zipping back and forth between managers and employees.

So instead of meeting once a year to discuss why Andrea was put in the “Meets Expectations” box after a year of doing her job, we need to burn that form and throw it away forever.  I suggest that we replace this annual nightmare with frequent and brief meetings between manager and employee.  We’ll get to what’s going on in the job and the company so that everyone’s in the know, ideas are shared, issues are tackled and our pal Andrea will actually pay attention instead of waiting until the end to hear about what her raise is going to be.

And I’m not in the minority –

Facebook’s 2,000 employees give regular feedback after meetings, presentations and projects – no scheduling.  It’s 45-second conversation that consists of:  “How did that go?  What could be done better?”

The benefits of moving away from this once a year process are:

1. avoiding surprises with performance issues
2. eliminate pre-evaluation meeting anxiety and fear
3. avoiding inaccuracies on performance issues
4. removing the focus from pay to performance
5. not defining our employees by a performance score number
6. eliminating the sins of recency: that’s when managers only remember what has or hasn’t occurred over the last few months and that’s what they end up putting on the reviews forms
7. providing clarity for what’s expected of our employees and what they can expect from us

This process is easy but it can get screwed up if it’s not done right and do you know how to do that?

Stay tuned for the next post on how to do this right!

Continue reading »]]> I’m a fan of reading leadership blogs and That’s Why They Call it Work got my attention this morning.  For the record, I really admire this author and her style.  I was nodding my head in agreement like an enthusiastic cheerleader while reading the article.  The author compares ‘old school’ leadership styles of how employees should be loyal company soldiers and do what they’re told vs. a workplace where employees are empowered, have  caring leadership and meaningful work.

This article sets up an amazingly positive and progressive concept of how workplaces and leaders should be but you know what they say about something being too good to be true right?  Well this is too good to be true.  Workplaces are like families and have various levels of dysfunction from top to bottom.  I have been guilty of saying, “There is no nirvana, that’s why it’s called work.”   So while I was agreeing with the words I was reading, my cynical voice was shouting that it’s unrealistic.  It’s just not possible or practical to give every employee a job where the work is fun and stimulating.  It’s common for people to have parts of their jobs that they don’t like.  Equally common is for people to be in a job they hate because they need a paycheck.

The author goes on to say that companies should hire people who have passion for what they do instead of being in it for the money.  While that would really be cool, most people work to make a living.  It’s the perfect balance when we’re able to do both — love what we do and make a living.  But I haven’t interviewed anyone, in over two decades, who didn’t express an interest in the salary for the position they were interviewing for.

On the topic of hiring, I found the below comment absolutely golden:

When we hire people, we shouldn’t be so obsessive about whether they have seven years of marketing or an MBA or some obscure certification. Employers need people to have some level of proficiency with the major elements of the job. But we put way too much emphasis on formal job requirements, in the stupidest possible way.

Again, while this concept is progressive and totally rocks, here’s the problem:  show me a hiring manager or recruiter who is capable of relinquishing their purple squirrel mentality and willing to be creative in the hiring process instead of looking for a resume that’s a mirror image of a job description.  There’s another area that needs fixing and a story for another day.

So while the perfect workplace leadership scenario and the perfect employee-employer relationships are amazing concepts, we’re not there…yet!

What do you think?  I’d love to hear your comments.

Continue reading »]]>

Both are underrated, refreshing and should be enjoyed more frequently!

It seems that all I can think and write about is forms of communication — whether it’s feedback, sensitive discussions, listening, body language or the how’s and the why’s of communicating.

I’m not going to apologize for my borderline obsession on this topic because communication is an integral part of sustaining positive relationships — personal and professional.  I often question if we make enough of an effort to do it right.  Can you think of a personal or professional situation that escalated into a misunderstanding?  If you go back and trace the communication trail, could it have been avoided?  This is one of those gray areas that reflects the countless styles of human interaction.  And like humans – it’s imperfect.

I have a little story about my own epic fail with my daughter.  After you read it, I hope that you’ll have a takeaway on the significance and simplicity of recognizing communication styles of ourselves and others.

A few weeks ago, my 20-year-old daughter sent me a text message telling me that her “dumb phone” was falling apart and was there any chance of getting a new phone now instead of waiting until our contracts renewed in 6 months.  You see, this was about the 1oth time she’s initiated the cell phone discussion.  Each time, I gave her the “C’mon, your priorities should be on school, not having a smart phone so you can update your Facebook” speech. Little did she know that I was already in the process of purchasing pre-owned smart phones to surprise her and her brother for their upcoming birthdays.

Since I had information she didn’t have and didn’t want to spoil the surprise, I was nonchalant with her concern of having a broken phone.  Later that day she called me with emotions boiling over.  She felt I was dismissing her and didn’t understand why I wasn’t acknowledging the issue of the broken phone or willing to discuss options to solve the problem.

Whoa!  I get it — calm down girlfriend!  So while I was ascending the throne of Duchess of Damage Control, everything I neglected to do hit me right between the eyes.

If I had a do-over I would:

Address & acknowledge the details & priorities with clarity & factual information. My daughter’s desire for a new cell phone wasn’t about having an 8-megapixel camera — it was simply about having a phone that worked properly and without broken buttons.

Tailor communication based on your knowledge of the listener’s style. Had I been wearing my empathetic hat, I would have gone back to my college days and recalled the trepidation of managing the new demands and life skills that college students face.  My lack of communication added to her pressure that ultimately resulted in the enjoyable emotional ambush I received.

Set expectations and next steps. What are the available options to solve the problem and what is the timetable?

When we take time to find the pain points of discussions and consider options to work towards an agreeable solution, we have an immediate progression in our relationships.  Sure we’ll have those times when the solution doesn’t result in a happy happy joy joy ending but don’t we owe it to each other to listen and be heard with clarity?

Photo credit:  stock.xchng

Continue reading »]]>

Continue reading »]]> Last week I had a long conversation with my friend Dana.  She’s been in a new role for about 6 months and while she was speaking about her corporate life, she sounded lost.

The gig

Dana runs a healthcare facility that’s a branch of a large corporation.  She’s responsible for talent acquisition, building facilities and maintenance, client relations and employee relations.  It’s an enhanced office management role with a focus on profitability and customer service.  While she doesn’t have an HR background, she has access to corporate HR support.

The reporting structure

Dana reports to a regional supervisor, a regional manager and a regional medical director.  All are offsite and regularly travel.  She’s learned that everyone has their own set of priorities and goals that are not consistent.  So she’s expected to meet varying and changing expectations while navigating management styles and layers of bureaucracy.

The challenge

How does a professional manage up with a lack of cohesiveness within the leadership goals along with a disconnect in communication?  The regional management team isn’t on the same page relative to prioritizing their expectations both of Dana’s job functions and the management of her facility.

Since mixed messages became the norm, she took the initiative to suggest weekly conference calls for activity and informational updates.  I thought this was a great idea because she was achieving two-way communication that was productive and offered a clarity for all.  Clarity doesn’t have to exist 100% of the time but without staying informed of big picture goals, changes, shifting priorities and idea sharing, how can one perform well?  While that did work for a brief time, the regional team was inconsistent with the calls which sent the message that this simple process of information sharing wasn’t a priority to them.

The questions

While it is Dana’s responsibility to make every effort for success in her role, is it reasonable to expect everyone on the management team to have mutual and consistent expectations?

How aggressive proactive does Dana need to be to make sure that critical information that directly impacts her success makes its way to her in a timely manner?

There are plenty of other questions but these were a few that she and I discussed.   She’s experienced in her industry and position yet she says she feels like she works in a fog and is sometimes the last to receive news and important updates.

This might be an easy to solve in theory but actually doing it is not.  What got me thinking is when Dana said,

“I’m at a loss at what other steps I can take to stay on top of achieving our goals when I feel like I spend more time trying to stay in the information loop instead of being able to make a difference by doing my job.” 

There is no perfect company and leaders are far from perfect but there is something to be said for having a simplified process.  Folks should not have to fight to receive feedback and clear direction for the opportunity to make a difference within their organization.

What do you think?

Photo credit iStockphoto

Continue reading »]]> Health insurance is far from a stimulating topic, well unless you’re the Federal government, but that’s a story for another day.  I applaud health insurance brokers and benefits specialists who do this on a full-time basis.

I would like to see health insurance carriers start treating subscribers the same way as auto, homeowners and life insurance carriers do.  Think of driving.  If you get too many tickets or accidents or decide to drive your car after a few toddies, you’re in big trouble with your carrier (and the law!) and will be nailed with higher premiums — as well as probably being dropped like a hot potato if they find out.  Have fun shopping those car insurance rates due to making the choice to be irresponsible on the road.  Have you tried to purchase a generous life insurance policy if you’re not healthy?

Why don’t companies do the same with health insurance and employees?  Are our bodies not as important as vehicles?  If people choose to be irresponsible with their health — such as  make the choice to smoke or be obese without taking steps to lead a healthy life, why should healthy individuals pay the same premium as irresponsible, unhealthy people?    This question was posted to an HR group and one of the comments made was that it was discriminatory.  Seriously?  Would you tell your auto carrier that when they raise your rates because you’re choosing to speed?  I don’t think there should be equal rights and fairness with health insurance premiums.  Keep in mind, I’m not talking about individuals who have a real, diagnosed medical condition — I’m referring to those who choose to lead an unhealthy life.   People can’t play the ignorant card.  The data is plastered on television ads, the Internet, in schools and workplaces.  These are just a few statistics taken from the American Heart Association’s site.  There is a ton of information about obesity and smoking-related diseases as well.

• About 12 million (16.3%) of U.S. children ages 2 to 19 are obese.
• Nearly one in three (31.9%) U.S. children (23,500,000) ages 2 to 19 are overweight or obese.
• Nearly one-third (32.9%) of U.S. adults are obese (nearly 72 million adults).

Do we need to get into the damages of smoking? I didn’t think so.  I’m also tired of the crutches — smoking is an addiction, depressed people use food to comfort.  Enough already.  I say that companies should have the right to distribute health questionnaires from carriers and the premiums should be adjusted accordingly.

For the record, I also don’t think it’s a company’s responsibility to offer workplace wellness programs.  Your employer is not your mommy.  We should all be making healthy choices and taking care of ourselves each and everyday.

…now where’s my Ben & Jerry’s?     Yes, I eat ice cream and I believe in moderation and making healthy choices because I want to live a long time!

Feel free to share your thoughts!

Continue reading »]]> This was originally posted by Trish McFarlane and she has let me repost it here.  If you can help at all with any leads, please feel free to reach out directly to Steve using the below contact information.

I need your help today.

I start this post by saying that Steve Boese has no idea I’m writing this.  If he did, he may try to dissuade me.  That said, I have far too much respect for him not to share this.  You see, my friend Steve is going through what many of us have experienced at some point in the last few years….a layoff.  And while not completely unexpected, he certainly didn’t think his company was going to lay off a group of leaders last Thursday.

To tell you the most important thing about Steve is to share that he has strong character and is the kind of guy that gets the job done. He received this devastating news just one day before HRevolution.  He could have decided not to come. But he didn’t. He held his head high and came to the event that he co-creates and spent time around the very group of people from our industry who “get” what he does.

To quote the leaders in the HR Technology space:

“Steve, at the HR Technology Conference, we always cared about your “day job” because you are expert in running HR systems, especially from Oracle. Plus teaching others about it. Combine that with your social experience and media knowledge, and you’re one special guy.  We look forward to your being a panelist at this year’s event in Vegas, in addition to hosting an HRevolution session with Trish on our own program, after doing the full-tilt boogie HRevolution in our hotel on the Sunday afternoon before our opening reception.  In short, you are a Renaissance Man in my world.” Bill Kutik

“I’m confident that your next best opportunity will find you.” Naomi Bloom

Here’s what you need to know about Steve:

• He has over 15 years experience implementing enterprise technologies for Human Resources, Recruiting, Finance and Distribution, including significant experience with Oracle E-business Suite Applications in numerous industries and locations. He’s served in a wide range of roles from team member, to team lead, to Project Manager.
• Steve is an award winning Human Resources blogger, speaker, and host of the weekly HR Happy Hour radio show, a live call in show about HR, Talent Management, Recruiting and technology now entering its third full year.
• Steve worked as a Applications Consultant for Oracle Corporation and has also owned a consulting company.
• He is an Adjunct Instructor at RIT, teaching a Graduate course in Human Resources Technology.
• Steve spends his free time as co-founder of the HRevolution event. This is a progressive learning event for HR and business professionals that focuses on discussions around HR issues, technology, and media. HRevolution is in its third year and Steve is one of the organizers of the event each year.

What We Can Do To Help

Each person who reads this blog has business contacts. I ask you to think today of at least one person you can put Steve in contact with, one person you can pass his information to, one suggestion you can make to help Steve in his search. One of the most important reasons to build our network is that when we’re in need, our community can circle the wagons.

Let’s do our part to help Steve today. His contact information is below.

Email: steveboese@gmail.com

LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/steveboese

Twitter: @SteveBoese

Originally posted on Trish McFarlane’s HR Ringleader blog

Continue reading »]]> The Grateful Dead was before my time yet still have a massive following of fans of all ages.  This post isn’t about their music though.  I’d like to share my observations of the band, the loyalty of Deadhead enthusiasts and the lessons on leadership and cultivating a positive community in our work environments.  Please enjoy with an open mind and feel free to leave a comment with your thoughts.

I bought tickets for the Grateful Dead Movie Event to surprise my boyfriend hoping there might be something new for him to enjoy and also for me to gain a better understanding of “the Dead” phenomena that he’s talked about for years.  Little did I know that although I didn’t leave with a newly acquired taste for the music, I did leave with a new perspective of the common enigma that is the Grateful Dead.  The individual and collective demeanor of the band got my attention relative to leadership and cultures within organizations today.  So while watching this movie that was originally filmed in 1977, I couldn’t help but dig for a pen and jot down notes of what I found to be admirable traits that are applicable to businesses and leaders today.

• Humility. Although Jerry Garcia is viewed as the band’s leader, he preferred to simply be a part of the band.  While watching the interview with him, there was no sign of an ego, arrogance or personal agenda.  I saw someone who was comfortable admitting that he didn’t have all the answers .  Garcia had a genuine desire to continually improve his craft and spoke about the personal difficulty of integrating learning with discipline.

• Commitment & building loyalty.  The Grateful Dead appreciated and cared about their fans and showed it.  Their priority was to build a relationship with their fans by performing more live shows vs. being in a recording studio.  They remained focused on the unique style of music that fans were accustomed to which grew their fan base tremendously.  There’s a bit of a debate over which rock and roll band has performed the most live shows in history.  Based on my research, I can tell you that the Dead is in the top 3 by having performed over 2,300 live shows.  Deadheads have been known to follow their tours for months or years on end.

• Giving back.  The Dead walked the talk and promoted a sense of community among all Deadheads.  They were the first band to perform more free concerts than any band in the history of music.  Early in their career, they even dedicated time to their community by providing free food, lodging, music and health care to those who attended their shows.

• Innovation & taking risks.  The Dead funneled their money back into their shows and weren’t satisfied with the house sound system at the venues where they played.  In 1973 and what seems like a crazy risk at the time, they built a distortion-free sound system called The Wall of Sound which was the largest concert sound system ever built.  The technical challenges and transportation challenges they faced with this endeavor nearly bankrupted the band.  Knowing what I know now about the band, it makes me wonder if they did this so that the fans outside without tickets could enjoy their shows too!  They were also known for their musical improvisation and blending vocals with the goal that each show would be unique.  It’s been said that you’d never hear them play the same song in the same way twice.  How’s that for flexibility and change?

• Bottom line results from a clear vision. While the Dead never had multi-million dollar album sales or won Grammy Awards from their music, they left an indelible mark on the history of music that is unchallenged to this day.  Their mission and vision of maintaining satisfied fans was a steady one.  When the Rolling Stones were charging $100 and upward for a concert ticket, the Dead capped their ticket price at $30.  The Dead’s steadfast loyalty to their fans created a reciprocity that grew their fan base from their inception in 1964 and even after Garcia’s death in 1995.  I read that Grateful Dead Productions currently generates a revenue of $60 million each year in sales and licensing fees.

The takeaway that I had after this movie and from further reading is that the Dead created a win-win environment for their fans and their business.  There was no greed or pretentiousness.  They did their job well, accepted their fans and treated them well.  I know that leadership and business can be more complex than those few sentences but I also like to think that a little common sense can go a long way in our corporate world.

Don’t be a collector of more than you need, got a lot of things growing, but keep watching your seeds. – Grateful Dead, One Thing To Try