Comments (2)

A few weeks back, Matt Blumberg of Return Path wrote a post about what gets said versus what get’s heard and nothing is more applicable to this than the language of deadlines.

Let’s examine some basic logic here.

If on Monday you say:

“Have this done by Friday,” this says to me that you are expecting this no later, but not necessarily any earlier, than Friday.  This also says to me that you won’t harrass me tomorrow or the day after about whether I’ve done it, but I should expect full retribution if by some extraordinary reason I don’t have it to you by Friday.

“This needs to be done ASAP,” this says to me that I have to either a) guess as to what you consider to be ASAP for me or b) apply my own interpretation as to what ASAP means.  If I’m not masochistic, I will probably ask you to clarify when exactly you want this done by, which is when you should respond with the phrasing in the previous paragraph.  However, most people will assume b), which will probably not be the same timeframe as a).   Therefore, if I hand the assignment in the next day when you actually wanted it the previous day, you cannot tell me I’m late with it and you certainly can’t go around writing on my reviews that I don’t meet deadlines! “ASAP” is not a deadline; it’s a figure of speech.

Same thing applies to setting priorities:

“This is more important than what you’re currently working on so do this first,” means I have to drop what I’m doing and do this new assignment. It doesn’t tell me when I have to turn it in but that’s what the above guideline for setting deadlines is for.

“This is really important,” means this absolutely needs to get done and I should definitely not forget about it.  However, the other work I’m doing is also important, so I’ll just add this to the queue. A statement like this gives me absolutely no guidance as to where this task falls in the food chain, which is fine unless you actually wanted it to get done first.

The moral here is be precise.  Be clear.  Think of it as covering your own ass.  When setting deadlines and priorities, you have to be so clear that there is only ONE way that your words can be interpreted.  That way no one can say “Oh I thought you meant this.”  If you don’t do that, however, don’t get all huffy that people can’t read your mind as to when and in which order you want things.

Comments (1)

I had the distinct pleasure of attending a meeting between a few of the hedge-fund Senior VPs and a dozen Associate-level employees to discuss “Opportunity and Work Diversity.”   As the Associates were piling into the room for the firmwide “initiative” they volunteered to get involved in, there were so many hopeful faces.  The firm had recently hired a cracker-jack CFO who was truly interested in making his very large department a better place to work and this initiative was one of many signs of this.

When the meeting started, the SVPs said they wanted to hear it all: the good, the bad, and the ugly.  As the meeting progressed, it became astonishingly obvious that they were not prepared for how bad and ugly the truth actually was.

The Associates touched upon two different problems: one was the monotony of doing the same job for 3 or more years without any option to do something else (diversity) and the other was the fact that given the “flat” organization of the firm there was no upward movement or career direction (opportunity).

This was a unique opportunity for the SVPs — to get inside the minds of the people working for them and really listen to how they felt.  Listening, however, was the thing they did least at this meeting.  What they did the most was defend–themselves and the current way of doing things.

The SVP’s made three of the most horrible statements a senior manager can make to his employees:

1. That peoples’ success in this firm was due partly on their skills and accomplishments and partly due to luck (being in the right place in the right time).  The horror of this brutal but honest admission would have been overlooked if it had been followed by an intent to take the luck factor out of the equation for success.  This is, after all, not a startup and 95% of the employees hired into this group are not scrappy and ambitious to rule the company one day.  They are career minded.  They are accountants and financial analysts looking for a home.
2. That hiring out middle managers instead of promoting from within was “just how a business is run.”  To this, all the Associates looked at each other and silently asked, “what’s my motivation, then?”  If no matter how hard I work, you won’t promote me (unless I’m lucky…) and instead hire and outsider (whom I will likely have to train), why am I here?
3. That titles don’t matter.  In many cases, many firms, and many industries, that is a 100% true statement.  However, most of the people working for a large financial institution are not lifers.  They are, at some point, whether it be after 2 years or 10 years, going to jump ship.  When they do, they will be shut out by most of the other financial world if they do not have a title to show for their longevity.  Additionally, a title or promotion is a concrete way for many people to measure their own success and how they’re doing at a job.  When you say titles don’t matter yet some people still have them, what does that say to the person who doesn’t?

The meeting continued in this fashion.  To every complaint, the SVPs had a response to why things were done a certain way.   What they failed to realize is that if a number of people feel a certain way, it’s valid!! No matter how they feel about it, it’s valid.  They should be taking notes and asking themselves WHY? instead of defending the status quo.

If there is one thing that I want to instill in management, it is this:

Do NOT pretend you’re interested in the truth of what your employees are feeling if you’re not completely committed to taking action on the basis of their truth.

It is deceitful and dishonest and your employees will see right through it, just as the Associates did in this meeting.  Almost every one of them walked out of that meeting frustrated.  I bet a few whipped out the old resume, which they hadn’t seen in several years.