Monkeys: LIBERATING Time Management Concept [Video]

Monkeys are the “leading cause of death” of new leaders.

Recent conversations with a few new(er) leaders about this common pitfall, prompted me to post this here. If you don’t have time (28 min) to watch this, then you probably really need to watch this. 😉

This time management concept saved my professional life.

After about 7 years in operations of skilled nursing facilities at The Ensign Group, a skilled nursing, seniors housing, home health & hospice, and radiology company, I spent 5 years there as the Chief Human Capital Officer. What an exciting time. Ensign’s “First Who, Then What” approach to growth meant we had to attract and train a lot of AITs into facility-level CEOs fast.  Over those 5 years, I personally participated in the training of about 100 new leaders. Week long boot camps, case studies, online tests, conference calls, assignments, analysis, etc.  I saw, up close and personal, what helped new leaders succeed … and fail.  

Monkeys has a lot to do with both.

I’ve trained the topic to groups in the hundreds at association conferences to 1:1. And, I wrote about monkeys years ago here:

But, this is the video that gives a thorough explanation of Monkeys and that my colleagues and friends have found most useful to understand the time management concept from theory to practical application.  While there are several healthcare operations and Ensign references, the principles are universal.

I hope it helps you or someone you know:

 

Advertisements

I just want to be … feared?

This video is a worthy 12 minutes to make us pause and reflect.  The danger I see in talking about leadership is that the “lessons learned” or the lesson “meant to be taught” usually overemphasizes that one aspect of leadership.  The responsibility of leadership REQUIRES several traits/skills/habits, not just one.  Even though this focuses on one, as long as we see it as a string in the tapestry of what leaders need, I find the concept here to ring true.

Making people who “work for us” feel safe seems to require taking the LONG VIEW toward your business and the co-people around us.  Ofttimes, a company’s culture will trump our better-inner-leader.  We perform according to how we’re measured and so its critical that we find a culture that allows for that.  Even better … its critical that we shape our company’s culture into one that fosters that long view as well.

Pat Lencioni: Stooping to Greatness

I’m a fan of Pat Lencioni.  I’ve used his ‘5 Dysfunctions of a Team’ and ‘3 Signs of a Miserable Job’ many times over the years.  While he certainly points to ‘things’ to watch and focus on as a leader, he also subtly makes the point that the influence of the leader is great.  His December newsletter (below) makes that same case — without blatantly making it.  The leader(s) of the organization’s personality (passion, measurements, values) has a direct impact on the organization s/he leads.

I’ve become far less worried about having ‘secret sauce’ stolen b/c, at the end of the day, it’s the people living and executing that secret sauce that really makes it happen.

It’s this SOFT stuff that separates the good from the great.  Anybody can grow census.  Anybody can manage expenses.  Anybody can provide adequate care.  But, to become great takes a concerted effort to synthesize the values & desires of a leadership team into a common mission and way of work.  And then … to stick to it no matter what.

Pat’s December newsletter:

Stooping to Greatness

Earlier this year I had the opportunity to spend time with the CEO of one of America’s most successful companies, a legendary organization known for its employee and customer satisfaction, as well as its financial performance. I attended their company’s management conference, listened to various presentations about their culture, and the extraordinary, homey and sometimes slightly wacky practices that distinguish them from their competitors.

Overwhelmed by the organization’s simple and powerful behavioral philosophy, I asked the CEO a semi-rhetorical question. “Why in the world don’t your competitors do any of this?” The CEO thought about it for a moment and said, “You know, I honestly believe they think it’s beneath them.”
And right away, I knew he was right.

After all, every one of those competitors, the vast majority of whom are struggling, knows exactly what this company does, how it works, and how much it has driven its financial success. The company’s cultural approach has been chronicled in more than a few books. And yet, none of them tries to emulate it. In fact, based on numerous interactions I’ve had with employees who work for those competitors, I’d have to say that their attitude is often dismissive, even derisive, toward this company and its enthusiastic employees.
And this dynamic exists in other industries, too. A fast-food company I know has remarkable customer loyalty, as well as unbelievable employee satisfaction and retention, especially compared to the majority of their competitors. The leaders and employees of the company attribute most of their success to the behavioral philosophy and attitude that they’ve cultivated within the organization, and the unconventional yet effective activities that result.

One example of that philosophy is the action of the CEO, who shows up at grand openings of new franchises where he stays up all night with employees, playing instruments and handing out food to excited customers. Few CEOs would be happy, or even willing, to do things like this, but this executive relishes the opportunity. These, and other activities that most MBAs would call corny, are precisely what makes that company unique.

This happens in the world of sports, as well. There is a well-known high school football team where I live that is ranked near the top of national polls every year. They play the best teams in the country, teams with bigger and more highly touted players, and beat them regularly. The secret to their success, more than any game strategy or weight-lifting regimen, comes down to the coach’s philosophy about commitment and teamwork and the buy-in he gets from his players. That philosophy manifests itself in a variety of simple actions which speak to how the players treat one another on and off the field. For example, players pair up every week and exchange 3×5 cards with hand-written commitments around training and personal improvement, and then take responsibility for disciplining one another when those commitments aren’t met.

And yet, whenever I explain this and similar practices of the team to other coaches who are curious about their success, I encounter that same sense of dismissiveness. They get a look on their face that seems to say, “listen, I’m not going to do that. It’s silly. Just tell me something technical that I can use.” As a result, few teams actually try to copy them.

Some skeptics might say, “come on, those companies/teams are successful because they’re good at what they do.” And they’d be right. Those organizations are undoubtedly and extremely competent in their given fields, and they have to be in order to succeed. But plenty of other organizations are just as competent and don’t achieve great levels of success, and I honestly believe it’s because they’re unwilling to stoop down and do the simple, emotional, home-spun things that all human beings — employees, customers, players — really crave.

What’s at the heart of this unwillingness? I think it’s pride. Though plenty of people in the world say they want to be successful, not that many are willing to humble themselves and do the simple things that might seem unsophisticated. Essentially, they come to define success by what people think of them, rather than by what they accomplish, which is ironic because they often end up losing the admiration of their employees and customers/fans.

The good news in all of this is that for those organizations that want to succeed more than they want to maintain some artificial sense of professionalism (whatever that means), there is great opportunity for competitive advantage and success. They can create a culture of performance and service and employee engagement, the kind that ensures long term success like no strategy ever could. But only if they’re willing to stoop down and be human, to treat their customers and one another in ways that others might find corny.

Finding YOUR Voice

I love the book ‘What Got You Here, Won’t Get You There‘ by Marshall Goldsmith.  Our CEO introduced it to me/our organization a year or so ago.  As I see Administrators in Training (AITs) learn, grow, lead I see some of them not understanding a similar truth: ‘What got THEM THERE, Won’t Get You There.’  There are certainly lessons to learn from more experienced leaders that new leaders would be wise to not repeat the hard way.

However, the very essence of leadership is wonderfully defined by Warren Bennis in his classic, ‘On Becoming a Leader.’  He says …

“…no leader sets out to be a leader per se, but rather to express himself freely and fully.  That is, leaders have no interest in proving themselves, but an abiding interest in expressing themselves.  The difference is crucial, for it’s the difference between being driven, as too many people are today, and leading, as too few people do.” On Becoming A Leader,” pg. 5

On Becoming a Leader, Warren Bennis
On Becoming a Leader, Warren Bennis

A friend of mine who is in his second semester of his first year in the school of hard knocks shared this with me and it rang true as I talk to new leaders who are trying to duplicate the ‘voice’ or the ‘vision’ or the ‘religion’ of other leaders before them.

My advice for the new Executive Director is to …

  1. Take the time to earn CREDIBILITY with your team/employees.  How?  Using the 3 Signs of  Miserable Job framework, spend the first couple months with each of your direct reports to get to know them deeply (Anonymous), helping them see the importance of their job (Relevance), and deciding together how to best measure their performance (Measurement).  This shows them how much you care for them and their success.  It builds trust.  It lays the foundation for loyalty.  Which prepares you to establish, with them, the WHAT/VISION.
  2. Instead of using someone else’s vision (unless your passion for it matches or surpasses its creator), empower your team to create a shared vision or direction for your operation.  This process usually takes a couple months if done right.  The creative/participatory process earns the vision/direction immediate buy-in that force-fed vision/direction lacks.

Taking the time to establish the credibility and forming the relationships of trust is the lubricant that allows the establishment of a successful, shared vision of the future.

Talent & Leadership

Over the years I’ve been involved with leadership development from several perspectives:

1) The brand new, first time leader (mostly failures & school of hard knocks)
2) The new leader of a turnaround business (different set of skills needed)
3) Member of the leadership team for an organization
4) Director of Leadership Development, training over 50 individuals to become GM/business unit chiefs.
5) Lifelong student (MBA @ USC’s Marshall School of Business)
While I love learning (reading, watching) from other experts, I can’t help but apply all of that through my real-world lens that prevents me from swallowing everything put forth. And, since successful leaders are needed now more than ever in healthcare, I’ll dedicate several posts to the subject here.
Recently one of my company’s new, promising Administrator-in-training/CEO-in-training (AIT/CIT) questioned some of my statements/critiques of Marcus Buckingham’s best seller, First Break All The Rules (Great Book) during a training week we affectionately call boot camp. My email response is below:
TO: Eric

RE: my rejection of Gallup/First Break All The Rules … I like MOST of what’s in that book. I really like the 12 questions and the scientific basis for their conclusions. However, I think they ignore one major variable in the talent/success formula — chemistry with supervisor. Good to Great talks about ‘the RIGHT people on the bus,’ as you know. I think G2G also ignores this in determining what makes someone ‘right.’ I have seen (and seen in my partners) many times when someone was ‘great’ at what they did for one leader and then that same person was not the ‘right’ person for the new leader. If the person has the talent for the position, s/he should thrive according to both G2G and 1st Break. But, the reality is chemistry with the talented person’s leader is critical to his/her ability to thrive. Furthermore, where there is strong chemistry/trust, I’ve seen (again, many times) a great leader be able to help underperformers change and succeed. Instead of debating whether or not the person had the talent to become great, I believe we’re better served by focusing on creating rock-solid relationships with the people we lead — allowing them to become what sometimes only we can see them capable of becoming (the Dulcinea concept).

So, I don’t reject Gallup. Just like I don’t reject G2G. I just find their discussions of talent incomplete. Talent-mapping or profiling for a position is really tricky business. We came very close to attempting this for our Administrator in Training/Executive Directors selection a couple years ago. You can maybe find a few common characteristics of successful leaders in the company. How do we know that very different people can succeed here or do better than we’ve seen. This approach becomes even more troublesome when you see the huge difference in types of operations, geographies, rural/urban, size, demographics, stages of stability, etc. I would have a much harder time thriving in a small rural town than someone who is better equipped for that. Yet, we don’t have luxury of knowing the nature of what opportunities will be available for the new CEO in Training when hired.

What I take from Gallup is playing to people’s strengths. We need to do a better job of this here. We’ve learned by sad experience that just b/c you’re very successful at one operation does not mean you’ll be successful at a very different one. What happened to our previously very successful leaders when they change facilities or market dynamics or people dynamic change significantly and then they fail? Didn’t they have talent? In other words, I find predicting success based on past experiences or exhibited talents incomplete. Fit and timing are more predictive in my opinion. I’m not saying past experience and talent is meaningless. Of course it’s useful. So, what do I look for in an AIT/CIT? I look for how likely they will fall prey to the factors of derailment below. I’ll take very different talents b/c we need all types and all types have been successful here. But, I don’t want the leader who appears to be perfect for the position who is clueless about his/her blind spots, weaknesses, and has never changed his approach based on learning from hard experiences. That’s what I focus on in my interviews.

See the article and book excerpt attached for a better explanation of this school of thought. I don’t see it far off from what Gallup or G2G is saying. I just think it’s a more complete viewpoint taking into account an individual’s chemistry, timing (peter principle), fit, and pride.

I’d love to hear your thoughts.

 


And, I’d love to hear YOUR thoughts too …

‘Speed of the leader …

… is the speed of the team.’ I heard that phrase for the first time about a year and a half ago when a young, new nursing home leader stepped into his first opportunity to run a skilled nursing facility in San Diego, CA. The opportunity was daunting … the facility was old, beaten-down, beneath a freeway overpass, across the street from a strip club, and competing with some of the best looking and operated facilities in southern california. Takers?


This guy jumped in and ‘owned’ it from day one … running fast. He modeled what he expected and later required from his staff — putting customer service/satisfaction (for residents, patients, doctors, vendors, etc.) above everything but quality care. The census and financial performance naturally followed. A year and a half later, the facility is neck-and-neck with the competition — enjoying clinical, census, and financial success like never before.

The speed of the leader is the speed of the team … is true, but only part of the story.

The speed of the leader and team are both dependent on the quality of care. What this San Diego leader and team had going for them, that many in their situation don’t, is a stellar Director of Nursing and care outcomes. That is basic and fundamental before attempting any radical transformation.

One of the secrets to their success was the personal attention the leader gives to doctor relationships. He, along with his team, work hard to convince skeptical doctors to send them a patient to ‘prove’ the hype is not hype, but true. Once that doctor’s patient arrives, her satisfaction becomes priority #1 which leads to a changed reputation for the facility … 1 MD at a a time.

Thou Shalt Not!

One of the biggest challenges in providing the highest level of service in healthcare is to undo the years of phrases and vocabulary that is so common and so destructive. We’ve all heard the following:

“She’s not my patient”
“That’s not my job”
“The other shift didn’t do it”
“There’s no supplies”
“There’s no time”
“I’m in a hurry”
Etc.

When we started our transformation, we started here … with vocabulary. We introduced Communication Guidelines in the form of “THOU SHALT NOT SAY …” All of the staff could relate to saying or hearing each one of the 10 phrases at some point. Like with all our training, we made it fun/funny as we introduced the new requirement.

Then … we laid down the law. We stated that saying any one of those prohibited words/phrases would be cause for termination. We were serious. We don’t want to lose any of you. Etc.

When we termed a CNA for saying “She’s not my patient,” the entire facility found out about it and realized we were, in deed, serious about the experience our patients/customers receive. After the employee was termed, behaviour changed … big time. There was a noticeable difference in the verbal communication with people in the facility … more polite. More aware.

Everyone’s been told not to say those things before. But, it is the full committment of the leadership of the facility (meaning willing to lose people) that is required to see the change take effect.