What do I mean by infrastructure?  All the tools, equipment, facilities, practices, and routines we use to accomplish anything.  Stuff like pens, pencils, computers, desks, computer programs, meetings, agendas, and standard operating procedures are all part of our infrastructure.  Much of our infrastructure is transparent to us, so much so that we can operate without even thinking about it.  We know where to find the coffee cups for our morning coffee, where the shampoo is in the shower, and we drive our cars without consciously considering gas pedal, brake, steering wheel, mirror, etc.  As Nike says, we just do it.

About the only time it seems that we notice much of our infrastructure is when it doesn’t work.  It is at those times that it comes out of the background of transparency and into the foreground of a problem or breakdown.  And when our infrastructure doesn’t work, IT becomes the things we focus on, and our productivity drops.  Just recall the last time your word processing, spreadsheet, or presentation software didn’t work if you want to see the impact of an infrastructure breakdown.  No matter how motivated or committed you are, or how inspired you are by leaders, if the infrastructure doesn’t work, your productivity dives until the infrastructure is repaired.

I believe our infrastructure establishes the limits of our productivity.  For the past several years, I have been focused heavily on publishing academic articles dealing primarily with change management and resistance to change.  My book shelves, both at home and work, my computer files, and the classes I taught were all organized around academic publications in the area of change management.  My infrastructure supported change management, so when I looked around to see what I could work on, all the things in my infrastructure pointed to and called for “change management”.

Recently I was promoted to full professor.  As a result, the “publish or perish” pressure is off and I no longer “have to” publish.  I am really free to work on whatever I want.  Although I have always worked on what I was interested in, the big difference now is that there is no “have to” in the background nagging me to do another article or book.  So, what will I work on with all this new found freedom?

Well initially I found that I continued doing what I had done before.  How could I do much else when all my infrastructure was organized to support someone who was working on becoming a full professor, not someone who was a full professor?  If I wanted to do something different, I would have to build a new infrastructure.  The one thing I knew I wanted to do was play more golf, so I joined the OSU Golf Course.  A new piece of infrastructure that requires I develop new habits and ways of working.  I also just completed taking an inventory of the books in my home office to see what no longer speaks to me.  Interestingly, a number of books I have had for years are now gone.  Next are the computer files.

The leadership literature tells us you need a vision in order to know what infrastructure is required to fulfill it.  But how do you clear the space so that you can see what vision to create?  As I eliminate more of the infrastructure I have depended on for years, I have an experience of less constraint and more freedom to pursue other things.  But I also notice that I have less certainty about what to do.  Our existing infrastructures support who we know ourselves to be.  When we start taking them apart, it can create some uncertainty.

So, I am in the midst of dismantling one infrastructure and building a new one.  I suspect that this will take sometime.

Most of us have experiences similar to those reported by Chiang.  I once order some electronic marketing materials online with a “money back guarantee”.  When I downloaded it and found it did give me what I wanted,  I emailed and called the seller – multiple times.  At no time did he respond (sorry, I don’t remember the  seller’s name), so I finally contacted my credit card company, went through their processes, and eventually got my money back. Interestingly, even though I don’t remember the seller, I do remember one of the people who endorsed him (whom I also contacted and who didn’t respond) and I will no longer consider his products either.  Unfortunately, not only do the people who “don’t respond” hurt themselves, they cast a shadow of doubt over everyone else in the business.

But “no response” is not limited just to businesses.  How many people do you send replies to when they send you something important?  How many people tell you when they got the report, the email, the proposal, or any number of other things you invested in providing them?  Is your opinion of them higher or lower as a result?

I, like most people, get plenty of emails.  Some are simply “fyi”, whereas, others want me to do something.  In each case, I read the email to determine if it is something they need to know “I got it” and, if so, respond accordingly.  I am not yet 100% reliable, but I am working on it because I think it makes a difference to the other person.  I like knowing when people get what I send them, so I assume they would like to know as well.

The other day I was changing a light bulb in my basement work area.  One of the screws holding the cover on the light was tight, so used a screwdriver to loosen it.  When I was finished with the screwdriver, I threw it down onto the workbench (I was on a stepladder), where it hit and scattered some small ceramic tiles I had been removing from a table made by Laurie’s dad.  I found all the tiles except one and was upset because its loss would mean the table could not be restored in its original form.

When I went upstairs to tell Laurie, my first thought was to say “The screwdriver knocked a bunch of tiles off the workbench, and now I can’t find one.”  And that’s when I noticed how the absence of accountability sounds – there is no “I” in the action of what happened.  My initial thought made the screwdriver accountable for the lost tile, not me.  I was the one who threw the screwdriver and my having done that accounts for why the tiles were scattered.

As I thought more about this one example, I began to notice how many places I leave off any mention of “I” when things happen, as if they happened on their own accord and I was simply an observer.  You know, stuff like “The cup feel off the dish drying rack and broke” rather than “I hit the cup and knocked it on the floor.”  The more I considered explanations for things that I have something to do with, the more I realized that the key word missing in those explanations was “I” and what “I” did that produced the result – good, bad, or ugly.

Perhaps you have noticed the same thing when people give explanations – there is no “I” in what they say except, possibly, when it is something good.  Check it out.  Listen to the explanations you and others give and see when there is an absence of accountability.  Let me know what you discover.

I recently had a conversation with a manager who was disturbed by her inability to meet the expectations of those “higher up” (her term).  They would give her assignments and then, when she would complete them, they would point out something that was missing they expected to be included. Has this ever happened to you? Although it is easy for this manager to blame the “higher ups” for not being clear, she shares some of the responsibility for not finding out what they wanted.

If you look at each of your current assignments, are you confident you are 100% clear about what is expected of you in every case?  Is everyone else involved in the assignment also 100% clear about what you expect of them?  Or are you assuming you’ll figure it out, or they already know?

Assumptions and expectations are “silent standards”. We take a big risk when we assume that everyone knows what to do. If creativity is desirable, it’s fine to give a general direction. But if there are specific creative requirements that matter, you’ll want to get them spelled out.

Take the time to spell things out. What should the final product look like? What are the components? When do they need to be ready? Are there other people who should be involved and if so, who?  Is there a particular method or process that should be used or avoided? What restrictions and specifications apply? Don’t take a chance: assume nothing is obvious.

Remember: everyone associated with an assignment has expectations and assumptions.  Some people expect you to ask for their advice, others want to be kept informed, and some only want to be involved in an emergency.  And, they expect you to operate according to these expectations even if you don’t know them!  Ask people to take time with you to spell out their expectations.  Yes, you have to ask.

Sometimes people are afraid to ask because it might make them look less competent or capable, or they don’t want to deal with an unpleasant reaction.  One way around this is to say something like “I want to be sure you get exactly what you want and in order to do that, I want to be sure I understand the assignment clearly.  I don’t want to complete it only to find out there is something missing that you wanted included.  Could we take a few more minutes to clarify some things?”

Getting clear creates a common ground in that both of you know what is expected.  This has the effect of turning an expectation into an agreement and gives you (and them) the opportunity to say whether you can or cannot do what they ask. If something new comes up later, you can always say, “I didn’t agree to that, but I’m willing to consider it.”  What you want to avoid is having to say, “I didn’t know you needed that,” or, “I thought this is what you wanted”.

Reduce your risk by taking time to unspoken expectations into clear agreements that everyone can see and understand.

The idea behind offering incentives is that they make a task or activity more attractive than it might otherwise be and thus increase the likelihood that people will do it.  But, as Dan Pink indicates and the research supports, extrinsic offerings don’t always work and in fact may actually make the activity less attractive.  But does this mean that incentives don’t work?  No, it means that what you offer someone as an incentive may not be an incentive.  Whether or not something is an incentive depends on its effect on the person to whom it is offered.  Incentives are meant to incent – to arouse or encourage.  If they don’t do this, then they aren’t incentives even if you call them incentives.

Whether or not something is an incentive, therefore, depends on the person to whom it is offered.  To offer workers who want more money more time off is unlikely to occur as an incentive to them.  In fact, you are likely to hear someting like “What kind of incentive is that?”, or “That’s no incentive?”  Since whether something is an incentive and works as incentive depends on the person to whom it is offered, using incentives is a tricky business.  In fact, many managers have found attempting to use incentives frustrating because they can’t seem to find “what works” and what they can provide isn’t always sufficient.  This is one reason why books on recognition, such as Make Their Day! Employee Recognition that Works, have become popular because they focus on things managers can do other than offer incentives.

One way around this issue is to ask people who are hesitant to do soemthing you want done “What would it take for you to do this?” and then determine whether or not you are willing to “pay the price”.  Another way around this issue is to build the level of integrity in the relationship so that people are accountable for what they say and know that they will be held accountable for what they say.  Surprising as it may seem, most people truly value their word and do not want to gain a repuation for being someone who “says yes, but does no”.  Giving people the opportunity to operate consistent with their word, and then operating consistent with their word, reduces the “guessing game” of incentives.  Then, when you do want to use incentives, you can ask people and they will tell you what will work.

Although there were a variety of answers, there were two underlying themes.  The first was how to motivate people to change.  The second was how to deal with people when they resist change.  It was all I could do to say “If you stop trying to motivate them, you might find they are more cooperative.”

Stop trying to motivate people!? Are you nuts Ford?  Isn’t motivation what leaders and managers are supposed to do?  How do you expect to get people to do what needs to be done if you don’t motivate them?

The answer to that question has two parts.  The first is by making good requests and getting good promises in return.  The second is by consistently following up on those requests and promises in order to build credibility, trust, and accountability.

In many cases, “motivation” has become the code word for convincing, either positively or negatively, people to do something we want done.  Such convincing may involve trying to inspire them, making them feel guilty or obligated, offering them some inducement, or threatening them.  But regardless of its form, convincing people (motivating them) has the effect of reducing people to victims.

How does it make them victims?  Because it says we are the cause of their behavior, not them.  They are doing what they are doing at the effect of “our” motivation.  It is tough to have others be accountable when we say we are the one motivating them – so they aren’t accountable for their behavior, we are.

Why not stop trying to motivate people and let them be accountable for their own motivation?  Make good requests in which you ask people to take actions or produce results by a specified due date, ensure they have the resources needed to do what is asked (this includes time and availability), and that they have an idea of how to accomplish what is being asked.  Let them know you are taking them at their word, ask if there is anything they need from you, and set a time to meet to discuss the outcome.  Then follow through true to your word.

Something happens when people realize their internal state (motivation) is not your responsibility, but is up to them.  They become more willing to engage with you as partners rather than someone you have to convince.

Many managers believe that understanding is key to getting people to act.  Managers spend a considerable amount of time explaining, describing, and discussing things on the assumption that if people really understand what is needed, they will be motivated to do it.  The problem, however, is that understanding alone is not sufficient to get people to act.  People understand that if they want to lose weight, they need to eat less and exercise more.  But that doesn’t get them to exercise.  The same is true with people at work.  Just because they understand the need for something, doesn’t mean they will do it.

If you want to increase the likelihood of people taking action, use REQUESTS and PROMISES.  The intent of a request is to have someone else commit to producing a specific result or completing a specific action by some due date by asking them to do so.  Here’s an example of a request: “This is what I’d like you to do: Have the XYZ report on my desk by 5 PM this Thursday. Will you do that?”  When they accept your request, they make an agreement with you to produce the result or complete the action.  Of course, they can also decline your request or counteroffer.

The intent of a promise is to have you take action by saying you will produce a specific result or complete an action by a specified time.  Here’s an example of a promise: “If you need support on getting the report done, I will assign someone else to help you by the end of today.”

When people accept your requests and you make promises, both of you know what is to be done and by when.  They are no longer left to figure out what you want based on their understanding – you have told them.  Making this switch from “understanding” to “performance” (requests and promises) makes a remarkable difference in managers getting what they want, when they want it.

Folklore has it that if you want to kill a werewolf, you do it with a silver bullet.  In fact, the story is that a mere threat of being shot with a silver bullet will stop one in its tracks.  Ordinary people are also stopped in their tracks, sometimes with a single word or phrase, or tone of voice. These silver bullets stop productivity in its tracks.

A silver bullet is unique to each of us: it’s whatever way we don’t want people to think, say, or feel about us.  If we’re afraid people will think we’re arrogant or inconsiderate, then any hint that we are being arrogant or inconsiderate can stop us cold. If we’re proud of our honesty and integrity, or our intelligence and open-mindedness, or our principles and values, then we can be brought down by someone suggesting we’re dishonest, stupid, biased, or unprincipled.

Silver bullets are very effective – they always alter our behavior.  I know a manager who won’t ask his boss for anything – he doesn’t want to appear “incompetent”. Another friend doesn’t want to be thought of as “pushy”, so she avoids delegating assignments and does it all herself. An executive says he won’t apologize because he doesn’t want people to think he is “weak”. When we’re hit, or even threatened, by a silver bullet, we stop what we were doing and focus on how to deal with the insult.

The solution?  Get to know your silver bullets. What’s the worst, most offensive thing someone could think, say, or feel about you? What is the most important aspect of your reputation? What is the worst way to be perceived in the workplace? The answers to these questions will reveal potential silver bullets that give others control, steer you toward making reactive decisions, and jeopardize your performance.

Then consider disarming the bullets by “making friends” with them.  One way to do this is by public acknowledging the silver bullet through a closure conversation.  For example, one of my silver bullets is being called or thought of as “stupid” (and I have a Ph.D. to prove I’m not!).  Whenever I have a concern that people might feel or think that, I say something like “I know I might appear stupid at times, and its true that there are many things I am stupid about, but this is not one of them.”  I have even introduced myself to MBA classes making a statement like this just so that it will not be an issue for me.

Silver bullets are never about others, they are about our fears.  Maybe those accusations don’t deserve the power we’ve given to them.

[Adapted from Deadline Busting: How to be a Star Performer in Your Organization by Jeffrey and Laurie Ford]

No one is a stranger to failure.  We failed repeatedly before we learned how to sit, stand, walk, or ride a bike.  If you drive a car with a manual shift, you probably failed many times before you learned how to coordinate successfully the pressing of the clutch and gas pedal to produce a smooth shift.  Failure is a natural, and in most cases, inevitable result of trying something new, something we have not yet learned how to do.  In other cases, failure is the result of trying something that we are already good at, but which didn’t work at the time.  For example, Michael Jordan, one of the most accomplished basketball players of all time, is quoted as saying  “I’ve missed more than 9000 shots in my career. I’ve lost almost 300 games. 26 times, I’ve been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I’ve failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed.”

Thomas Edison once said “I haven’t failed,  I’ve found 10,000 ways that don’t work.”  There are two things of interest in what Edison said.  The first is that when he said “I haven’t failed”, he was speaking in terms of his overall goal, which was to find a filament for the light bulb.  Clearly each of the 10,000 attempts he made failed to produce the needed filament.  Failure, then is relative to the objective, goal, or purpose you are striving to achieve.  No objective, goal, or purpose, no failure.

The second is that Edison used failure as feedback.  Each time we fail, we have the opportunity to invalidate ourselves by saying something like “I am so stupid,” or “I will never learn this”, or any number of other things that make us feel incompetent, inadequate, or insufficient.  Edison didn’t do that (at least in this quote).  He used the failure as feedback on what didn’t work – an d learned from it.  The value of failure is that it tells you that what doesn’t work.  It doesn’t tell you why something doesn’t work, only that it doesn’t.  Failure, then, is valuable feedback if you are willing to listen to and learn from it.  And therein lies the opportunity.

Odds are, not everything you do will work.  Few of us achieve every objective, reach every goal, or accomplish all of our purposes.  Failure is inevitable, even for star performers like Jordan and Edison.  The issue is not whether you will fail, but what will you do when you do?  One thing you can do is to blame others (e.g., coworkers, customers, managers, etc.) or blame conditions and circumstances (e.g., order process, reward system, information systems).  Doing this, however, results in learning nothing new.  By blaming conditions and circumstances, including other people, we pass up the opportunity to learn new ways to interact with others or to try new techniques which may be more effective.  In a very real sense, we condemn ourselves to repeat what didn’t work.

Alternatively, we could use the failure as an opportunity to discover what it was about what we did (or didn’t do) that could have contributed to the failure.  Was it something I said or failed to say? Did I prepare myself and others completely?  Although considered the best player of his time, Michael Jordan was said to have practiced more than any of his teammates.  This included practicing the kinds of shots he might be called on to make to win the game.  He used his failures as an indication of what he needed to work on, what he needed to practice.  Failures weren’t an invalidation for Michael, they were important to future successes because he was willing to use them as feedback and develop his own abilities rather than blame others.

Management is simple, but it isn’t easy.  But, we can make it easier if we are willing to use failures as feedback for developing ourselves rather than as opportunities for blaming others.

Flying back from a seminar in California, I read an article by Clive Thompson in Wired Magazine (Issue 17.08) entitled “Forgetful by Design”.  In it, he discusses how we forget most things and that forgetting is really useful.  However, the internet, particularly You-Tube, Facebook, and other sites where all manner of personal information is posted make it more difficult to forget.  Why?  Because we can Google people and find all kinds of things that might otherwise have been forgotten.  The internet, unlike our memory, doesn’t forget.  Even though it might be hard to find, if its posted, its out there.  So, he proposes that we now have to remember not to remember.

What has all this to do with management, leadership, or anything else for that matter?  First, it reminds us that in the absence of some mechanism to keep us from forgetting, we (and others) probably will.  Posting something on the internet keeps it in existence.  It doesn’t disappear.  We might forget that it is out there, but a good search will find it, allowing prospective employers, spouses, and others to recall what we did.

Second, it reminds us that if you want to remember something, or want others to remember something, you have to find a way to keep it in existence.  One of the reasons people keep “To Do” lists is so that they will remember what they have to do.  The same with schedules, they help us remember meetings, appointments, and when we will work on things.  Relying on memory is not sufficient in today’s world.

If you find that people are often late with things, start sending them polite and respectful reminders to see if there is anything they need from you or that you can do to support them.  If people don’t write things down they say they will do for you, send them an email thanking them and briefly outline what it was they agreed to do.  The point here is to give them some support in remembering, since the odds are they will forget.