Why do so few employers check references?

This isn’t going to be a post in which I pose a deceptively simple question in the title, and then blow your mind with a concise, insightful, yet counter-intuitive answer (ha!), like I’ve attempted with interview questions, career choices, or long hours. I am genuinely stupefied, mortified, and mystified, as is Jackie Chiles.

ml63o_f-thumbnail-100-0_s-600x0

Personally, I have not given a job offer without calling references. I have, however, been offered a job without having my references called. And, much more often, I have been asked to stand as a reference and not received a call from the candidate’s employer–even when “my” candidate received an offer. That pattern leads me to believe that very few employers are like me and follow through with reference checks.

But a sample size of one is weak, so I did some quick research. I found a good piece from SHRM describing how to perform background and reference checks, that references a CareerBuilder survey from 2014 revealing that in many industries more than half of applicants falsify their employment history or qualifications, among other statistics about the problems unearthed during checks.

That CareerBuilder survey got a lot of mileage on other sites describing HOW and WHY to check, but even top-of-the-funnel marketing guff from recruitment automation vendors like SkillSurvey (in Fortune) and Checkster (on their blog) didn’t provide any more primary or secondary research about HOW OFTEN employers actually follow through with checking references.

So I am sticking with my original conclusion that employers are not checking references often enough, and exposing themselves to huge financial and productivity risks. While you’re at it, why pick up a pack of cigarettes and leave your seat belt unbuckled during the commute home?

The authors below have done a fantastic job explaining how to perform effective reference checks, while reinforcing why you must be either indecisive or bad at hiring if you don’t:

If you can answer or refute my original question, “why do so few employers check references?” with some convincing data, please do! Otherwise, I hope the resources above enable you to join the proud and effective minority of employers who do.

Precise and consistent use of language is a requirement of any effective organization

The contemporary social convention of expecting people to believe what you mean, not what you say, was epitomized by Peter Thiel’s fascinatingly distorted explanation how different groups take Trump seriously or literally, but not both. This has disturbed me at a visceral level since I first encountered the phenomena years ago in certain individuals’ speaking styles, then more broadly in (social) media through the recent US election cycle. Only recently, while re-reading one of my favorite books (Jacques’ Requisite Organization), was I able to articulate why.

Canadian Jazz + Politicized Snoop = Genius.

The first failure of imprecise and inconsistent language is to place the cognitive burden on the listener, rather than the speaker. In a world where discretionary leadership bandwidth is the scarcest commodity, this puts a severe constraint on the growth of any team – large or small. Whether you are speaking to a peer, a manager, or a subordinate, it benefits both parties for the listener to spend the least amount of time and mental effort deciphering your message from among your words. Furthermore, in any role where you expect the listener to convey your message to others, or support your ideas when you are present to defend them personally, any lack of clarity that leads to misinterpretation introduces an unnecessary risk. In short: don’t be lazy when you communicate.

The second failure is to undermine trust, the fundamental component of a functional team. The strength of any team starts with the strength of the one-to-one relationships between its members. Fans of Lencioni’s Five Dysfunctions of a Team will recognize trust as the starting point towards results. If my team member, let’s hypothetically call him Donald, expects me to “take him seriously, but not literally,” can I trust that Donald is going to be consistent in his communications (or even his reasoning) from one conversation to the next? That he is going to represent my ideas and values accurately after he walks out of the room? That he is a reliable source of information for me from elsewhere in the team? These scenarios are just a few of the myriad of examples that will inhibit trust in our relationship, and therefore prevent our team from engaging in constructive conflict, strengthening commitment and accountability, and ultimately focusing on results.

Precise and consistent use of language is a prerequisite of any effective organiation. And it starts with you. Choose your words carefully, use them consistently, and take the time to seek positive confirmation of mutual understanding in your conversations. Nudge your teammates to find a common vocabulary — even if “your” words aren’t the ones that the group ultimately favors. Be brave enough to stop a group discussion if you observe inconsistencies between what people say and what they mean. Investing a few minutes early on will pay back with enormous dividends, as clarity brings efficiency and trust brings results.

Four Components of a Market-Beating Product Machine

Whether you a bootstrapping a new app or looking for faster growth in an enterprise segment, your team wants to build a market-beating product machine. Defeating your competitors in the race to gain market share isn’t a matter of luck, or charismatic leadership, or pure technological innovation…although having a bit of any of those three wouldn’t hurt.

You need to establish four distinct yet tightly integrated disciplines that span the traditional functional boundaries of Sales, Marketing, Product Management, and Engineering. This post will define the components, and leave space for future posts to expand the descriptions and discuss how to boost proficiency in each.

Market Eating Product Machine

Build, Ship, and Test in Rapid Cycles

This component encompasses not only agile (you decide little “a” or big “A,” I’m not going there right now!) software development, but also DevOps and user experience testing.

  • software development: scope, develop, and release high-quality code that delivers meaningful value to buyers and users.
  • DevOps: test, deploy, and support the product to achieve high availability and high performance, at scale.
  • User Experience: study how users interact with and experience the product to reduce friction (the bad kind) and increase stickiness (the good kind). This information can be obtained from users who are aware (in scheduled in-person sessions) and unaware (in anonymous A/B tests) of their participation.

Launch to Increase Sales Velocity

This component encompasses not only marketing (again you choose the case of the initial consonant, while I watch from the sideline), but also training and communication.

  • Product Launch: time-bound campaigns with narrowly defined audiences, objectives, and tactics designed to increase sales velocity (opportunity count times average deal size times win rate, divided by average sales cycle length). Retrospectives from launch campaigns can inform the next product development cycle as well as advancing the launch practice across products.
  • Training: ensuring that sales, demo, and commercial staff, both within your company and your channel partners, understand how to differentiate the product in order to win and close deals bigger, faster, and more often (see sales velocity above).
  • Communication: internal recognition and awareness of the latest product version might not directly impact sales, but certainly helps to build engagement.

Inform the Roadmap with Competitive Intelligence

Feedback from the market comes in many forms. An effective competitive intelligence component can both discern broad trends and extract precise insights to help expand, refine, and prioritize the product roadmap elements.

  • Analysts: as the subject matter experts who help to arbitrate between the supply and demand sides of the market, analysts’ rankings can help you prioritize strengths and weaknesses relative to your competitors. Analysts can also help to tilt the playing field in your favor through relationships shaped by strong briefings.
  • Customers: advisory boards, implementation/installation projects, customer success ans support interactions all provide meaningful data points as to how your product lines up with their aspirations and afflictions.
  • Win/loss: understanding specifically why your product drops out at each stage of the sales cycle, and surfacing gaps in perception between your buyers and sellers, can provide clarity on your competitive position both head-to-head with named opponents and compared to market expectations in general.
  • Market mapping: segmenting and quantifying the addressable markets can answer “where to play” and inform “how to win.”

Invest to Close Gaps and Widen Moats

Collecting and coalescing all the feedback from user testing, launch retrospectives, and various sources of competitive intelligence, it’s time to prioritize and assign resources to the next set of goals for development.

  • Build: based on the velocity and capabilities of your scrum teams, assign the goals internally. Hire, train, and develop as needed to grow this branch of investment.
  • Buy: fire up the M&A machine to acquire your competitors for their technology, for their customers, or to take them out of the market.
  • Partner: secure technology or services partnerships that give you access to markets and/or capabilities that your buyers value, faster than you could achieve them organically.

Each of these components will need to follow its own path of process maturity. Regardless, the largest benefits for your business will arrive as these components work better together. So, no matter where you are on the spectrum of crawling, walking, or running, start to establish the close integration between these four components and watch your product machine eat the market.

This post appeared originally on leadertainment.com

How these two things happen speak volumes about company culture

17You can gain deep insights about an organization’s culture by understanding:

  • how decisions are made
  • how recognition, aka “kudos,” is awarded

Consider asking those two questions about a company the next time you are interviewing for a new position, in addition to the other best job interview questions.

The answers to these questions reflect the leadership style and organizational dynamic established by the leader. As a recovering consultant, I could not resist the impulse to reduce this concept to a two-by-two matrix:

Learn about a company culture by understanding how decisions are made and how recognition is awarded
Learn about a company culture by understanding how decisions are made and how recognition is awarded

 

In the lower left corner, we have a culture of lobbying and arm twisting where for decisions and recognition the forum is private and the basis is mostly on influence. This culture is often found in teams with weak leadership, where the boss is routinely peppered with closed-door “advice,” either thinly or thickly disguised as an agenda of personal advancement. Team direction changes frequently and indescribably, relying on informal channels of communication to disseminate the new direction. Expect high attrition from staff who value transparency and meritocracy.

In the upper left corner, we have a culture dominated by the “squeaky wheel” where for decisions and recognition the forum is public and the basis is mostly on influence. Tantrums, meeting hijack, and open conflict are reinforced as means to an end by the steady advance of a vocal minority in the organization. While also a product of weak leadership, the only improvement over the lower-left lobbying culture is that the rules of the game are publicly known. Anyone unwilling to compromise personal integrity for career advancement will not last long in this culture.

In the lower right corner, we have a stable, humble culture of relative introverts where for decisions and recognition the forum is private and the basis is mostly on merit. This culture likely reflects the self-image and natural personality of its leader. I’ve chosen a cupcake as the image to reflect this culture because it is a satisfying individual treat. While it might be relatively boring, this culture will also likely be more successful than those on the left side of the matrix, as individuals who cannot compete on merit alone and those who crave public recognition will exit.

In the top right corner, we have the most transparent, extroverted, results-oriented type of culture in this matrix, where for decisions and recognition the forum is public and the basis is mostly on merit. The multi-tiered party cake represents the culture in which the success of an individual greats benefits for the group. Decision making and recognition are public and merit, meaning that the “rules of the game” are clearly demonstrated and objective. While this culture requires a strong leader who is not afraid to hire “A players”, it will likely have higher performance and lower turnover than the other squares in this matrix.

In this summary, I have done my best to withhold judgement and simply provide a framework for readers to identify a company culture so that they can best chose the one that fits their own needs. If you have other “cultural diagnostic” questions to share, please leave a comment!

What does your one day résumé show?

“We each live our lives one day at at time” is a deceptively simple expression. The same goes for our careers. Comparing the resumes for professionals with 5, 15, or 25+ years of tenure will obviously show different experiences and capabilities. But regardless of your previous accomplishments, what would your resume look like from yesterday as a snapshot of your achievements in 24 hours?

Research from Right Management showed that 48% of professionals in the 18-24 age range update their resumes when a new goal is achieved, compared to 24% of the 35-54 age range. While this could be linked to the scarcity of significant development opportunities later in a career, or perhaps that 35-54 year olds have found more interesting things to do on a Tuesday night. Regardless, the statistic suggests that younger professionals are more aware of their professional achievements on a shorter timescale.

So as you read this and enter a new day in your career, think about what you are going to achieve in the following categories. I’m not advocating haphazard multitasking in order to check all these boxes in a single day, but instead encouraging  you to learn and develop, one day at at time.

Experience

  • Quantify the results of a project you’re leading
  • Ask for an endorsement from a customer or colleague
  • Volunteer to join an initiative outside of your “home” function

Education

  • Register for a graduate course (does your employer offer tuition reimbursement? As reported in Fortune, 83% say they do)
  • Begin a certification program from your employer, vendor (such as Pega Academy), or 3rd party (PMI reports that project managers with the PMP designation earn 20% more)
  • Seek out an adjunct professor role at a nearby university. Teaching is the best way to learn a subject more deeply.

Philanthropy

  • Volunteer your time as a tutor, mentor, or coach, or otherwise participate in activities to help others.

Speaking and Publications

  • Focus your own understanding and help to expand the knowledge of your community by publishing research and making presentations at events

It’s easy to get stuck on “auto-pilot” (no Tesla jokes yet…it’s too soon) and cruise through each day at work without the awareness of how you are honing your capabilities and expanding your knowledge to benefit others. Set off to work tomorrow with the intention of making your one day resume as strong as it can be.

Which of these six leadership hacks are you using?

One day I will get around to creating a Hype Cycle (à la Gartner) for management and leadership buzzwords. Somewhere in between blockchain and tiger team you will find leadership hacking.

I don't always use jargon, but when I do it is crisp and disruptiveLeadership Hacks are Cliché but Effective

No, I’m not talking about the guy that learned all the languages while blowing hard boiled eggs out of their shells (no hyperlinks: if you don’t get that reference already, I’m not going to torture you with finding out). Leadership hacks are those subtle yet amazing techniques that aren’t written down in Drucker, or HBR, or Military Doctrine. These are the six techniques that I’ve observed in the real world over my first couple decades of professional experience:

  1. The Compelling Event: to prompt action (or a decision) by a certain date. Also known as “pencils down.” Why it works? In a multi-tasking, oversubscribed world, this technique prevents the modern version of Parkinson’s Law from taking hold: that every task expands to fill the time allotted.
  2. The Three Legged Race: to get two team members to confront their differences and appreciate their complementary strengths. Long-term version also called “two in a box.” Why it works? Often we fall into the trap of confirmation bias when we can keep people, or issues, at arm’s length. By forcing close collaboration, this can be overcome.
  3. The Yes, And …: Remove the word no from your vocabulary. Just like in improv comedy, to succeed you need to encourage participation and contributions, and work on redirecting creative energy towards the goal. You might be pleasantly surprised by new thinking that arises. Why it works? Gives your team the chance to provide the solutions (and receive the praise) while you constantly reframe and reframe.
  4. The Pre-Project Press Release: Begin with the end in mind. At the start of a project (or software development cycle), write the press release that you want to cross the wire when the project ends. Why it works? Visualization is a time-honored technique in athletics, performing arts, and business. Resist the urge to run off quickly to take action without planning the critical steps by working backwards from the goal.
  5. The On-site Off-site: Take a team into a conference room full-time for a full day (or week) to reach the depth of focus required for a true breakthrough in thinking. Oh, and also actually finish a task that they start. Why it works? Our work days have been fractured into thinner and thinner slices of focus by technology and projects running concurrently.
  6. The Weekly Digest: Send your manager, your team, or your customers a digest of important and interesting highlights from your work week. Include graphics and short summaries linked to longer items or attachments for easy digestion. The best Weekly Digests are a mixture of what matters to the reader with the topics that the author wants them to keep front-of-mind, written in a style that is lighthearted and enjoyable to read. Why it works? We can’t rely on others to communicate the ideas that are most important to our own success. In the hundreds (thousands?) of emails that people receive weekly, it’s easy to miss something important. Sending a digest email at the same time each week makes it a predictable, and in the best cases eagerly anticipated, summary. Take the time to advocate on your own behalf. Or, in a more Orwellian sense, ensure that you are the one to document history on your own terms.

Which of these have you used successfully? What would you add to this list? Leave a comment and let us all know!

The post Which of These Six Leadership Hacks are You Using? appeared originally on Leadertainment.com

Is Your Professional Development Glass Half-Full or Half-Empty?

One of my favorite former managers, whom I am now fortunate to call a friend, used to say that “hindsight is the only option in the absence of foresight.” Perhaps that’s the reason I can now look back on the first 1.5 decades of my career and offer some insights about personal development.

In our careers, and perhaps in life, we progress through phases:

  • thinking that we know everything
  • realizing we know very little about anything
  • demonstrating that we know a lot about something (or for the fortunate, a small number of things)
  • accepting that we can never really be certain about anything, while remaining curious about everything
15607
What is an Executive, you ask? Usually I reserve sidebars like this for comedic asides, but US tax dollars commissioned the Occupational Outlook Handbook (http://www.bls.gov/ooh/management/top-executives.htm) and I want you to read it. Someone actually went to work over a series of hours to weeks and wrote this sincerely for the benefit of the US Economy. So please stifle all laughter when reading in the presence of public servants.

Previously I have written about specialization and capability development in career progression. In summary, as we follow a single career track our knowledge and proficiency become deeper and narrower, until we jump across to another track. Recently I realized two opposing corollaries to this concept.

The farther we progress on a single career track, two things arise

Pessimist’s view: the number of capabilities that you need to develop in order to advance gets smaller, and the chances that you have to practice or demonstrate them become less frequent. In my first year out of college, I was terrible at everything; pick any one skill and I would have 10 chances a day to practice doing it better (let’s start with “never hitting reply all“). Let’s say you are an executive with 25 years experience in the top decile of your industry, by some generally accepted scorecard. Maybe the thing at the top of your professional development list is “maximizing shareholder value from acquisitions.” Those are going to come along, like, once every 3-5 years? Even if you are in Private Equity or advise on deals you might only be personally responsible for a handful in a year. So the stakes become higher and the at-bats become scarcer. Pretty bleak.

Optimist’s view: your capability profile is positively differentiated from other professionals with equivalent tenure on other tracks, giving you an advantage in “disrupted” organizations. So if you are risk-tolerant enough to jump onto another track after developing significant capabilities, you are likely to find yourself in high demand (and it’s never too early to prepare a transition). Let’s say that on average, across industries, job descriptions for a given equivalent seniority level (e.g., “Vice President”) have 12 qualifications. If you are a top performer in, say, Marketing for a Software firm, and you see that there has been a major disruption in another industry, say, B2C Media or Telecom, you could find yourself in a situation where your skill set is a scarce and valuable asset compared to the incumbents who have been dutifully advancing their proficiency in the set of skills that was most valuable for the previous decade but is now less relevant. Will an executive search committee offer a prominent and strategically important role to an industry outsider in a time of disruption (read: crisis)? That will have to be the subject of another post!

So if you have managed to get this far in the post and are asking yourself, “What does this mean?” Here are is my advice, take it or leave it:

As you advance in your career, stay aware for opportunities to hone your craft, because the most important ones will become less frequent. At the same time, be willing to switch specializations because what is common in one organization could be rare and valuable in another.

What are the best job interview questions?

Mediocre interview questions are boring for everyone and don’t create clear differentiation between candidates, leaving the hiring manager to draw on gut instinct (also known as good old fashioned bias) when making a decision.

“How is this an issue?” Some interviews are doomed from the start.

Good interview questions help the hiring manager understand the relative strengths and weaknesses of a set of candidates in the context of the role’s requirements. Good interview questions are predictable enough that a candidate can provide composed, complete answers that put his or her best foot (feet?) forward, exhibiting both technical capabilities and unique personality traits.

Great interview questions make the experience engaging and informative for everyone involved. The best interviews build a positive reputation for the employer, regardless of whether the candidate receives an offer. The best interviews build confidence in both parties that there is a strong mutual fit and build positive momentum into the offer and joining phases of the hiring process.

So what are the best interview questions? Here are a few categories you should test for, regardless of the job description, along with a few examples I’ve encountered in my experiences on both sides of the interview table.

  1. Domain knowledge: “Tell me about five subjects on which you’d consider yourself an expert and how you gained knowledge in the area.”
  2. Interpersonal dynamic: “Think of a time where you discovered a mistake that would have caused significant cost to your team if it was not corrected. What was the mistake, who made it, and how did you resolve the situation?”
  3. Adversity and its aftermath: “Tell me about the most significant failure in your last role. What specific, personal contribution did you make that created the failure?”
  4. Unique contributions to success: “Tell me about the most significant success in your last role. What specific, personal contribution did you make that created the success?”
  5. Self-awareness and commitment to development: “What would you say is your main development area today? How did you become aware of it, and what are you doing to improve in that area?
  6. Professional relationships: “Looking at your resume, tell me in one sentence for each transition why you left and how you found the next role.”
  7. Mental fatigue: Near the end of the interview, ask the candidate to stand up in front of a white board and work through a tough logic puzzle like these involving weighty things, calendar cubes, or other popular techie puzzles. It’s not the answer that matters, it’s how the candidate demonstrates their ability to apply structured thinking under pressure.
  8. Mutual evaluation: Last, let the candidate ask any questions he or she has for you, so that everyone walks out of the room with the information they would need to make a decision on an offer. Are the questions about strategy, career progression, pay, coffee quality, weekend emails? You can learn a lot from what questions candidates ask in what order.

Please leave a comment if you have feedback or suggestions on this post. Happy hiring!

Executive Churn: It’s Not Me, It’s You

After enough seemingly random events, it’s natural for the human brain to start looking for patterns (just ask Daniel Kahneman). So when I recently heard news that one of my executive team was leaving the company to pursue the inevitable “other opportunities,” I started to wonder:

  • how did I manage to accept an offer with another company with an unstable leadership team?
  • where did my post-offer diligence break down?
  • what other blind spots do I have that are hiding major risks about this company?
article-0-0C6047DF00000578-851_634x424
Is there a revolving door in your company’s executive suite?

Then a surge of awareness kicked in, and I realized that my self-orientation was causing a perilous bias in my view of the situation. ELC-Mercer data from 2013 put C-Suite turnover among Fortune 500 companies at 7.4%, in 2015 Crist|Kolder put CFO turnover at 10.9%, and in 2015 PwC measured the turnover rate for CEOs as 16.6% in the largest 2,500 companies globally. So after a couple years at the same company, seeing one or two executives walk does not seem like a rare and exceptional event, or necessarily precede a corporate apocalypse.

And why does executive churn even matter? For a few reasons, at least:

  • the remaining execs will have to pick up the extra work left by the open seat
  • the instability of the team may spark a power struggle and additional executive vacancies
  • uncertainty among analysts and investors could spark a period of volatility and decline in the stock price, further devaluing the long term options for the remaining execs and increasing the risk that they walk away

Of course understanding why the executive team is leaving, and how extensive of a search the Board and CEO are doing in order to restore a balanced, effective and aligned executive team, are important questions to answer in order to understand whether the executive churn at your shop is in-line with the industry average, or a precursor to an epic corporate meltdown. So here are a few questions to consider when estimating the executive churn risk at your business, whether you are evaluating an offer of employment or already an employee:

  • how long has each executive been in place, and how does this compare to the median tenure?
  • how aligned is each executive’s experience with the go-forward strategy for the company?
  • which executive’s “work-life balance” is increasing the risk of burnout? Warning signs include execs who live in a city other than the corporate HQ and commute more than 2 days per week, or those who are temporarily filling open division or functional leadership roles in addition to their core responsibilities.
  • is there a defined executive succession plan in place?
  • have there been significant corporate turbulence that increases the succession risk for your company’s executives? For example: merger & acquisition activity, entering or exiting markets, or significant upward or downward movement of the stock price.

There is a certain balance to be struck between staying focused to be successful in your own role, and staying aware about existential risks for the company that could threaten your career stability, regardless of your own performance. Everyone has their own risk tolerance, and hopefully the questions above will help you make decisions to find a place in an organization where you can thrive.

image credit: Alamy via dailymail.co.uk

 

Two ways to build trust in a new manager relationship

Like many things in life, these options could be summarized as: the easy way, or the hard way. And I am not going to post the link to the Boondocks clip. You’ll have to find it yourself.

There's the easy way, and ...
There’s the easy way, and …

Manager relationships are…relationships. Establishing trust is essential for both parties to feel valued, engaged, and satisfied. Getting to that point in a short period of time, without triggering tears or rage, is essential for the long-term health of any relationship. And it doesn’t happen by accident. This post focuses on the employee-manager relationship; feel free to abstract these concepts to other relationships at your own risk.

Building trust requires establishing a mutually agreed level of autonomy for the employee under the guidance of the manager in two key dimensions:

  • time span of discretion: what is the longest duration task for which the employee can take complete accountability? Viewed another way, how long is the manager willing to wait for a status update?
  • delegated decision authority: which decisions can the employee make without consulting and or informing the manager?

Time Span of Discretion

Credit for this term goes to Eliot Jaques, whose book The Requisite Organization is underrepresented in the modern leader’s library. I will warn you that it is not a casual read; be aware that the large conceptual rewards packed into this book require a large investment of attention. With that disclaimer out of the way, the idea from the book that I’m highlighting here is about what duration task the employee has the trust of the manager to execute independently. Does the manager want to see a daily task list and a midday status update? In this case the time span of discretion is somewhere between 4-10 hours. At the other end of the scale, CEOs often embark on multi-year global transformation programs with the hands-off support of their Boards, often requiring quarterly status reports at a maximum.

Delegated Decision Authority

The best metaphor from this concept that I’ve encountered is the Decision Tree from Susan Scott’s book Fierce Conversations. Just as a tree’s roots, trunk, branches, and leaves have different weighting on the future health of the tree, the levels of decision making have different weighting on the future health of the organization (or the career of the decision maker). I’ve summarized the concept in the table below:

decision tree table

For example, the pair might decide that any decisions around hiring, firing, or promotion are Trunk decisions. Which vendor to choose for the trade show giveaways is a Leaf decision. And so forth.

Now that we’ve defined the two essential components to establishing trust, let’s address the original question of HOW to get there:

  • The Easy Way: proactive, implicit, inductive. Sit down with the other party and discuss, before any specific events occur, what level of decision making authority will be delegated and what is the time bound of discretion. Establish the boundaries of the relationship before they are tested. In another context, how do you learn your way around a new city? Look at a map before you leave the house, ask your neighbors which parts of town to avoid.
  • The Hard Way: reactive, explicit, deductive. Jump into it, wait for things to happen and then talk about whether the events fit within the desired boundaries of the relationship. This approach to learning the new city is to wait for sunset and then wander out the front door with some cash in your front pocket and hope you make it back in one piece.

My intent in writing this piece is to raise your awareness of what will help define trust in your manger relationships and how you are going about establishing it. You can choose to take the hard way without judgement; just be aware of the potential bumps and bruises you might encounter along the way.

Thanks to Dan Schultz for inspiring this post. Questions or feedback? Leave a comment!