Comments (0)

I’m teaching myself how to program.  A colleague of mine, who has been programming for decades, comes over and asks me how it’s going.  I try to (naively) show off how much I’ve learned by demonstrating a script I wrote, which abruptly fails as soon as I run it.

“Hmm,” I say, and try to step through the code to see if I can catch what I did wrong.

My colleague immediately start throwing his hands on my screen and telling me I’ve probably made a mistake here, here and/or here.

“I know,” I admit. “That is why I’m trying to figure out where exactly I’ve made it.”

“WHY?” He yells. “Just type these characters after this line right here [hand in front of my face, on the screen]: ‘E’, ‘R’, ‘R’ –”

“Wait a second. Why am I doing this? What am I writing?”

“An error output code! Why would you possibly waste your time looking for the error when the script can just tell you what it is??” He was getting visibly agitated…

“Well,” I try naively to defend myself, “I want to test myself on whether or not I remember the syntax well enough to see the error by myself.”

“That’s stupid.”

“…Well then, I’m stupid.  …Was there something else you needed?”

Being an expert means that you are used to dealing with very complex issues, not silly ones.  That is why experts take all measures to fix those silly issues in as easy a manner as possible (so they can go back to focusing on the big ones).  As a result, they see other people’s focus on those small problems as a total waste of time (as it is, for them).  However, as a novice at something, trying to do things manually is sometimes the best way to learn, and relying on the easy way out is a last resort (for when deadlines are approaching and your solution is not…).

Therefore, experts/experienced professionals, don’t invalidate the learning process of the peons.  You may actually shortchange their progress.  Let us struggle a little bit with it, because if we struggle and come out on top, we’ll know immeasurably more about the problem and the system than had we just taken a cop out.

If you want to help, ask if you can be helpful first.  Some people may feel embarrassed about not understanding something and may not want to admit it or ask for advice (just yet.  If this is carrying on too long, kindly insist on helping).  Those who do will probably proactively approach you.

And, just so you know, just because we don’t (or can’t) do it your way initially, doesn’t mean we’re stupid.

Also, using that word to describe us makes us want to plan your eminent demise… so…

Comments (0)

Walking up to my building today, I encountered a man and his 3-4 year old daughter standing in my path towards the door.  I tried to make eye contact and smile at the man, who, conversely, tried everything possible to pretend he doesn’t see me.  His daughter, not yet old enough to engage in such deception, simply stared at me.  Giving up my attempt at courtesy with the man, I turned, smiled at her, and said, “well hello there.”  She just continued to stare, quite rudely I thought.  Shrugging, I just continued to walk towards the door.  The girl ran after me, in order to hold the door open for her dad.  I gently gave her the door to hold and said, “here you go,”  hoping to incite at least a mild “thanks.”  Instead, she just kept looking at me.

Manners are a vicious cycle–if your parents don’t have them, chances are you won’t either, and that will detrimentally effect how people perceive and interact with you.

If and/or when your parents insisted on your using good manners, chances are they didn’t give you a reason why you should.  As you matured, however, you probably noticed that people behaved differently towards you depending on whether you were courteous or not.

Unfortunately, something as simple as manners matters dramatically in the corporate world.  Your levels of courtesy towards your peers, subordinates and superiors can mean the difference between whether you get a promotion, whether your employees are productive, and much more.  In a 2007 survey, 95% of executives and managers stated that good manners matter when it comes to advancing a person’s career in their company, and that is especially true in smaller organizations, where interpersonal relations are both more frequent and more crucial to the success of the business.

Simple choices of words and subtle gestures make a huge difference.  Some examples are:

• Adding “please” at the end of a request. Doing so makes the person you are asking feel like she’s doing you a favor by obliging, and that makes her feel all important, which translates into a higher likelihood that whatever you asked for will be done and done well.
• Adding “so much” to your usual “thank you.” In this day and age, a thank you is kind of expected (which means that if you don’t even say that, you’re going to have some co-workers feeling mighty unappreciated).  Therefore, to get a similar outcome as that in the above point, add a little extra oomph.
• Smiling.  Grinning at someone conveys that seeing him/her is something positive for you.  It also signals recognition and acknowledgement.  All good things.
• Looking up from your desk/computer/documents as soon as someone addresses you. You’re busy; everyone knows that.  However, giving someone your undivided attention is an important signal.  It means that what the other person is saying is important and worthy of your attention.  And don’t wait to finish what you’re reading before looking up, either.  That sentence/email/etc. will be there in a couple of minutes.  If you are honestly slammed with work, close your door.  That way people will know not to bother you.

The overarching theme here is that good manners in the workplace are actually extremely motivating.  They are also a source of self esteem for anyone who comes in contact with you.  Dale Carnegie is famous for saying that if what you do and say makes a person like himself more, he will instinctively like you more.

Comments (0)

The real difference between the two is the internal self-image you have of yourself as a manager and how it manifests itself in your behavior towards your team.

Confidence = setting yourself up in the mind of your team as a reference for when any of them have questions or make mistakes; making yourself available but generally not imposing your expertise; having your people want to come to you.

Arrogance = micromanaging your team and intruding your knowledge on them, regardless of whether you were asked to or not; checking up on others and consistently proffering advice; having your team choose struggle and head-banging-against-wall rather than coming to talk to you.

A confident manager feels comfortable in his professional and managerial skills.  It’s a quiet and internal confidence, one which doesn’t require you to flaunt your abilities.  An arrogant manager, on the other hand, feels the need to constantly reiterate his/her skills to others, likely out of insecurity.  The difference in behavior that results from the difference in your self-worth is often compounded by the reaction your team has towards you.  A confident manager gains respect of his team, reinforcing his/her sense of self; an arrogant manager incurs behind-the-back ridicule and frustration, reinforcing his/her insecurity.  Additionally, the team dynamic created by a confident manager is one that promotes reaching out for help whenever necessary—as opposed to prematurely or after having wasted too much time attempting to solve the problem—and therefore creates a more efficient and effective work environment.

Break the vicious cycle.  Get yourself to a place where external affirmation and education is not necessary to your self-image.

Comments (0)

In an era in which time is money and “fast” is almost always better than “thorough”, it seems everyone is talking more and thinking about what they say less.  The problem is that while our priorities may have evolved, people’s interpretation skills and emotional needs haven’t exactly kept up.  Though on a logical level we may understand that something seemingly offensive that you said may have just come across that way, logic (and a logical evaluation of your intentions) is not most peoples’ primary response.

Disagreements and hurt feelings can therefore arise not from what you say as much as how you say it.  I would even tend to argue that these kind of misunderstandings happen more in the digital age than ever before because an email or instant message doesn’t transmit emotion and tone particularly effectively.  It leaves the recipient to interpret what you said any way they please or anyway their mood at the time sways him.

So in this increasingly fast-based business world, how do you make sure you get across what you need to say quickly but without upsetting your co-workers or subordinates?

1. Think of the goal of what you’re trying to say and the way you want to say it before your mouth opens. Phrase it in your head (or in an email draft) what you want to say.
2. Ask yourself whether what you’ve just come up with can possibly be interpreted in a different way and whether that’s detrimental to your goal. Always look at what you’re trying to communicate from the perspective of the recipient.  Is it ambiguous?  Could it be taken out of context?
3. Forget what you composed for a second and reread it from scratch, checking for tone. If you were to receive what you’ve just thought of objectively, how would you interpret the writer’s intentions, as symbolized by tone.

Tone is everything.  Having a calm and positive tone, no matter whether your message is positive or not, changes the reception of your message.  Tone comes across in everything, even if you don’t intend it to.

A brief demonstration:

A: I want everyone to come up with 50 ideas each for tomorrow.

B: Let’s be ambitious about this and try to come up with a crazy number of different ideas as possible.   How does 50 sound to everyone?  I know we can do it.

(I am the boss of you and you will hate me vs. I’m your motivator and just a part of your group.)

A: I’m horrified that after all the work I put in, you would throw me under the bus like that.

B: At the last meeting, you told the VP that nothing had been done on the project.  However, I have actually completed it last week.  Can I fill you and the VP in on the status so we’re all on the same page?

(I’m a drama queen vs. I’m going to assume you’re not an a-hole and that there was just a miscommunication somewhere… even though that may not be true, you’ll get my drift.)

The message in each one of these sets of examples is the same.  However, the way your recipients accept your message in each case is very different.  The reaction they will have to your message and the opinion they will have of you as a boss, colleague, or person will be very different.  It may not be necessary to change the way you communicate, but it is absolutely necessary to be aware of it.

Comments (1)

Everyone pretty much agrees that there aren’t enough women leaders in the business world and there is a never-ending argument as to why.  Many companies, colleges, and organizations, in a well-meaning effort to attempt to resolve this problem, hold a fair number of “Women in Business” events each year.  The goal is to create a supportive and inclusive environment for women to discuss, open up, and share their struggles, tips and accomplishments.

Whenever I get an email to attend one of these events, I promptly delete it.  If any of the planners of these functions would actually ask any of the women who are the target of such events, we would resoundingly say in unison that we hate them and are actually a little embarrassed by them.

Why?

Women’s conferences only segregate women further

I thought the whole point was to make the business world indiscriminate — to say that women are no different or special or deserving of any extra attention than men.  Unfortunately, that is the very opposite of a what a Women in Business conference does.  It’s very existence says that women need their own separate event – to be segregated – because we’re different in some way.

One of the largest examples of this is the fact that the most widely-used discussion topic at women’s conferences are work-life balance.  Can you picture a man-only conference (if there are such things) discussing this? Probably not.  Though work-life balance is indeed a huge issue, it should be a huge issue for family women and men, but the fact that only women still discuss it unfortunately makes it a women-only problem.   Furthermore, it continues the stereotype and actually hinders women in getting a fair break in the workplace.  Most employers who are hesitant about hiring young women are hesitant for that particular reason – they expect that women won’t be able to work as long of hours or will have to quit unexpectedly in order to have a family.

Therefore, if you insist on holding women-only conferences, have them be about either common problems in a field of interest or dissemination of information critical to success in business.  The value is then that women can get access to the same information and participate in the same activities as men do, which would actually help level the playing field, but do it perhaps in a more welcoming environment.