Welcome to the complicated world of my chaotic mind!

Check out our Book Site!

http://www.org-immaturity.com

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

“Stay thirsty my friends."


Hmmm. The close to a blog post by my brother, “Stay thirsty my friends,” was an allusion to “Be Like Water” – direction from Bruce Lee…and a goal of my brother (see his Monday, April 26, 2010 post). But his close is interesting. Following his example, before I wax on the statement, perhaps we should break down the meaning of the statement.

As with most words in the English language, there are more than one meaning for the word “thirst.”

This is simultaneously the cause for many problems in our society (dual / confused meanings) and the beauty of our language (see poetry for examples). Thirst can be “the craving of liquids” – the sometimes unrelenting and overpowering need to consume liquids.

In Quantum of Solace, the latest James Bond movie, the 007 gives a can of motor oil to the villain as he abandons him in the middle of a desert. Yes, we learn later that he drank the oil. The power of thirst can be so powerful.

Thirst can be used for the craving of things other than liquids. And the thirst for other things can be as powerful as the need for liquids. The difference is the need for liquids is biological or physiological – while the thirst for power, fame, glory, riches, passion, compassion, love, applause, attention, or knowledge are not. These thirsts stem from a different central point in our beings. But is the craving any less powerful?

When our brains signal our need to drink it is a survival mechanism. Our bodies need fluids (specifically water). Without it we die.

So, when my big brother says, “stay thirsty” what did he mean? Did he mean to work hard so that we are always in need of liquids? Like, “sweat daily?” Or “just do it?”

Or did he mean, in a sly way, that we should not become satisfied. Not be satisfied with who we are, or where we are (station in life), or what we have? That we should continue to thirst for more and continue to strive to always be better? Ow. That would make self-contentment a bad goal. Maslow would be unhappy to hear it. Or would he? Is self-actualization a goal we should seek to attain or is it a road? A journey we should attempt to travel endlessly to our grave? Does contentment lead to complacency and eventually death?

Or did my brother simply mean to keep trying? Keep growing? Keep becoming?

I’ve heard a similar saying, “stay hungry,” used in sports a lot.

Lou Holtz has said that the problem was that his goal was too specific – winning a national championship. Once the team (including himself) achieved the goal…they became complacent. They were no longer thirsty.

He definitely would recommend staying thirsty. Perhaps he’d say “stay hungry.” Perhaps he would say always leave the table a little hungry. By the way, if our bodies tell us we’re hungry – you can safely ignore that to a degree. If you body tells you you’re thirsty…you’d better listen. We need water much more than we need food. No wonder water is the symbol for baptism. Water cleanses. Water heals. Water provides life. So, the old saying, “stay hungry” pales in comparison to “stay thirsty.”

Is it our brains that also signal our need to quench our other thirsts? If we don’t quench those thirsts – will we die? How powerful is the thirst for knowledge? How powerful is our thirst for attention? Are these addictions? No, not all addictions are bad things…you can be addicted to a TV show (24 anyone?), Butter Pecan Ice Cream (mom?), or even a game (chess).

Currently, Wikipedia defines addiction as a negative, “An addiction is a persistent behavioral pattern marked by physical and/or psychological dependency and tolerance that causes significant disruption and negatively impacts the quality of life of an organism.” So what would you call something that doesn’t have a negative impact but meets the other criteria? Whatever you call that (I look forward to your comments) is what I’m talking about. But perhaps I’m reading it wrong. Perhaps the negative impact is a result of not feeding the addiction or quenching the thirst. So, reading further, Wikipedia also says, “It is common in colloquial English usage to extend the use of the term "addiction" to also encompass apparent compulsive behavior and passionate dedication to activities (such as hobbies) by analogy.”

Again, the beauty of our language. So, I guess I’m ok. I’m just colloquial.

So, what is meant by “stay thirsty?” This is when I usually provide my conclusive answer to the questions I’ve posed, making the question rhetorical. And I get very few comments (which could be because I’ve answered the questions so well OR it could be NO ONE IS READING THIS!). So, while the temptation is strong to not provide my “take” on the answer, I’d be cheating if I didn’t. I mean, that’s what a blog is for, right?

I get to quench my thirst for writing, for expounding on my chaotic thoughts. You get to read this. I get to wait expectantly for comments which you get to refrain from adding. But are these thirsts? Or just hungers? What do I actually thirst for?

What do I believe I would die without? What thirst do I have which I find impossible to leave unfulfilled? What thirst, which if I don’t quench, will cause me pain and sorrow? What will result in “significant disruption and negative impact” to my quality of life?

I would surely die (or wish to die) if I could not quench the thirst within me for:

  • Love
  • Companionship
  • Competition
  • Mental exercise
  • My wife
  • My children
  • Serving others

Monday, April 26, 2010

Is Mike Golic Right?






Does Football teach us to have a lack of integrity?
Mike Golic would say "definitely not!" On his ESPN morning show, "Mike & Mike" (which I thoroughly enjoy) Greeny and Golic had the argument...Greeny saying there is a problem with a lack of integrity in pro football, and Golic holding up the NFL's side of the argument.

Here's my take:

Golf – high integrity…self-policing.

Volleyball (team sport) – while at some levels self-policing, at the best it is. Even in the high stakes games, you are not allowed to purposefully mislead the refs/judges and you are also not allowed to “distract” your opponent (finding a way to “cheat”).

Tennis – honor is evident (although there are exceptions).

The point? In most sports there is a level of honor and this is appreciated, and applauded. In Football, basketball, and soccer, the opposite is expected. You are expected to do everything you can to win, including confuse or deceive the referees. It reminds me of pro-wrestling where the ref is obviously (and humorously) distracted so that the villain can use a chair to put his opponent out.

So, the argument is, this should all be ok, since we have referees and umpires who are paid to make the call. But, the question isn’t if the refs are there, it’s should it matter if they are there? Why do some sports have an honor code and others don’t? And what’s the harm?

Well, when I learned that HS football (and basketball to a degree) coaches teach their kids how to do what are illegal moves, and to NOT get caught…I was shocked. The argument? Everyone does it. The refs have to call it for it to have happened. It’s part of the game. My simple argument? Should it be?

What does it do to our sport when we ingrain permission (in fact encourage) players to break the rules?

It teaches our youth some sorry stories. I usually champion the idea of sports teaching great things to our kids. But…if organized sports (you can’t get away with basketball “cheating” in a pickup game!) are teaching our kids to break the rules – as long as you don’t get caught or to lie / distract / deceive the refs – they may not have seen the play and you’ll sway them in your opinion, why would I want my kids involved in this environment?

And where does it stop? You have the leagues stepping in (when the risk is that the league will lose income) with enforceable rules to stop the obvious and logical result of teaching cheating. In basketball, intentional fouls, flagrant fouls, and then finally the Hack-a-Shaq rule. Why should the league have to create rules that hurt the teams chances to win – giving two shots AND the ball? In football, the rules are constantly changing to protect the wide receiver (when in the air) and the quarterback…two of the star positions. Why? Because the cheating taught throughout will get them hurt. That’s why clipping and chop blocks HAD to be enforced. Not because it was illegal (it was) but because people (stars) were getting hurt. In 2009, the teams playing against Favre decided to hit him early and often. Well, even late. A few penalties? That’s ok, if it gets him out of his rhythm and makes him play poorly. So basically, since the penalty for breaking (if caught) the rule wasn’t worse than the expected benefits, the coach puts that into his game plan!
So, if Shaq is killing you underneath – foul him on purpose AND do it hard enough and early enough that he can’t score on the play. So where does it stop?

We’ve seen “hard” fouls during the playoffs. Fouls though that are only a small step away from injurious hits. Why not? We’ve seen it in the past. The bench warmer (enforcer) comes in and lays out the other team’s best player so that he gets gun shy. Even if the refs throw the player out…it was worth it to the coach! So, they went to suspensions and then to fines. Wow. Why would the league's office need to do such things to keep players from purposefully trying to hurt another player?

Because they have accepted the little cheating (from claiming the ball went out off the other player to flopping) and actually made it part of the game.

Just because it’s always been that way (which by the way, it hasn’t ALWAYS been that way), doesn’t mean it should continue. And it definitely doesn’t mean we should be teaching it to our kids!




BTW, I’ve played organized sports as an adult (in the military), and at least in volleyball, I can tell you that I demonstrate integrity…I let the ref know when I’ve touched a ball on its way out of bounds. I let the ref know when I touch the net. I let the ref know when I don’t get the pancake, and the ball hit the floor. I do this no matter the score or situation. I’ve done it when it cost my team a game. Why? Because I want to win because I played better – not because the ref missed a call. No, not all volleyball players do this – but the best do. And I don’t mean “best” as in most talented.

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

What we can learn from Sports Part II

The arguments made in the comments aside, let’s continue the analogy. How much can we learn from coaching a football (basketball, tennis, volleyball, etc.) team? How much can we follow good coaching principles in sports to make our businesses run better?


To recap:


  • Leadership Team: Pick top level coaches based on how they fit the Head Coach’s system and find ones that will work as a team. Ones with expertise in getting the most out of the players.

  • Recruiting: Don’t think of it as hiring or filling a position. You’re recruiting based on potential and fit. You’re actively seeking the best fit for your program. Stop hiring and start recruiting.

  • Professional Development: Stop expecting ANYONE to stay around for extended periods of time. If you develop them well, they’ll move on to bigger and better things. Assistant coaches will become Head Coaches at other programs; players will become better paid players on other teams or assistant coaches themselves. And that’s a good thing.

  • Providing Feedback: The coaches works with the players to assess their play and get better. It’s a never-ending (continuous improvement) cycle.

Measures


So, how best to assess? In sports, coaches use tons of measures. They have staff who observe, collect, document, store, and report measures (let’s use basketball). Field Goal %, Three-Point-Field-Goal %, Offensive Rebounds, Defensive Rebounds, Assists, Steals, Fouls, Turnovers, Assist-to-Turnover ratios. All of these can be measured against minutes played. Of course there’s also Points Scored, Points Allowed, Free Throws attempted, Shots attempted, etc. per minute, per period, and per game. There are lot’s more! Imagine if the coach followed businesses’ example on using measures?


LeBron, we’re going to have to reprimand you (not give you a raise) because your numbers are down. Worse, businesses don’t look at ALL the data (too much to collect, too expensive to collect) – instead, they’d measure the players on only one, two, or maybe three “key” measures. AAAUGH!


If you’re only going to judge the players on a subset of the available measures, at least make those measures the higher level ones – GAMES WON!


No, in sports, we not only look at all the measures, we also focus on the areas of expertise. So for the Point Guard we look at Assist-to-Turnover ratio. For the defensive specialist, Steals and Blocks. For our scoring threat – we’ll use measures around scoring efficiency. As a team we’ll look at offensive and defensive efficiency. We’ll even breakdown how well our in-bounds plays work. Our effectiveness in the half-court offense. How effective our defense is.


The players will NOT fear the measures – in fact, they’ll clamor for them. Of course we may have the same issues as some selfish ball players – our staff may want to pad their stats at the detriment of the team. But, those people stand out (to fans and coaches and fellow players) and their behavior can be adjusted or they can be let go.


Heroes and Super Heroes

Yes, sports teams at all levels, like businesses, have to deal with heroes. But in sports, especially team sports, we find that the best players actually make those around them better. They don’t horde information (like not calling out a switch or impending pick on a teammate), and they don’t obtain their self-worth by hoping their teammates don’t get better.


Quickly, even the best players, realize that they have to become coaches on the floor. They get the team Captain emblem and work as hard as the coaches to make the team better. Why? Because regardless of the accolades they get for being the best (scorer, shooter, passer, rebounder, etc.) it pales to being part of the reason the TEAM wins! Even the best players (LeBron included) learn that the real goal is to win as a team.


Ask Michael Jordan, arguably the best there ever was. If he didn’t have teammates who helped him to excel, and the team to win, he’d be an almost-was instead of a superstar. We need to find the “team goal” – the vision for the organization. We need to identify measures of success for the organization. We MUST know how to determine that the “team” has won. And we need to all celebrate (not just the heroes and definitely NOT just the Coaches). Look at who ends up holding the trophy the longest. Who hugs it? Who kisses it? Not the coach.


So, all of this post is based on the ability for businesses to identify team goals for the organization. We have to have a way of winning. We need a “prize” at the end – a trophy to compete for. That reminds me of the Air Force saying, “Officers compete.” We knew in the Air Force that competition was NOT a bad thing. Competition is a good, time-tested, American, incentive for behavior. Guaranteed, every business has a competitive element. Even NFPs compete (with other NFPs and with the things they are trying to overcome – poverty, disease, cruelty, etc.). Pick the business or organization and there is an element of competition. There are goals to achieve and battles to win.

It only requires a little creativity.

And a different viewpoint.

A coach’s viewpoint

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

What We Can Learn from Sports



This entry was tough to pen. Not because I didn’t know what to say, but because I had so much to say. I need to post about my theory on using Coaching Techniques in the work environment. I need to post about my book signing exploits and presentations (had a really awesome one recently in Chicago). And now I want to write about how “the truly ignorant are impossible to offend.”

Where to start? I guess I have my next three posts planned.

What we can learn from Sports in the Business World

So, Notre Dame hired a new football coach, Brian Kelly. And like a good head coach, one of his first tasks was to put his coaching staff (spelled leadership team) together. He let all but one coach go from the previous staff. He fired the existing leadership team and then recruited among his network for his coaching staff. He didn’t post the jobs on Monster.Com. He didn’t put ads in the papers. He looked through his black book (I’m guessing here) and called up the people he wanted to work with…the best that he knew and talked them into coming to ND to work with him. To work with him to make a winner!

Wow, how about that.

Leadership Team

So, the CEO leaves (fired, retired, resigned, etc.) and the new one is hired. Can the CEO do the same as the head coach? Why not? She should sit down with the existing leadership team and see if there are any she wants to keep. The right move? Let most (if not all) go. You don’t want to work closely with people you didn’t hand pick…not if you’re trying to make a winner. Then, don’t send a list of open positions to Human Resources – nope. Pull out your little black book and start calling those leaders you want to work with. People you’ve worked with in the past. People you know can and will get the job done, and done right. People who will make your leadership team a success! It’s not what I normally see – normally, the new boss watches and listens for 6 months to a year, before she starts to make changes. She tries to ascertain what the strengths and weaknesses are of the leadership team she’s inherited. What a waste of time! Rather than working on moving the organization forward (making it a winner), we throw away up to an entire year so that that new boss can learn the organization before making changes. Let’s follow the coaching lesson and gut the leadership team! Start fresh with a team you know will work well with you. A team which will help implement your plans!

So, what else can we learn from coaching? Well, the head football coach does NOT normally get involved in the small details. I mean he has a team of assistant coaches and those coaches have assistant (position) coaches. Everyone trusts each other to do their job. The assistant coaches are focused on their area of expertise (offense, defense, special teams) and the head coach trusts that they will be able to carry out his vision for each. That’s important enough to rephrase and reiterate. The head coach provides VISION for each area of focus. The head coach TRUSTS his next level of leadership to get the job done, and get it done well. That means within the rules, within the values of the organization, and with the mindset of doing what’s best for all.

Another essential is that all of the coaches – down to the specialty coaches (managers) all know they are part of ONE team. They may have different ideas, innovative ideas, things they want to try and risks they want to take…but it’s always with the overall success of the organization in mind. If the Quarterback’s coach ends up having the quarterbacks of the team drafted high each year, but the team keeps losing, they are NOT a success. The goal isn’t just to do your job well, but to have the team as a whole succeed…otherwise there will be a new head coach, and most of the coaching staff is soon to be replaced (see beginning of this rant).

Perhaps the most important thing we can learn is how the team is populated. How are recruits found? How is the team formed? How are the players treated?

Recruiting

Players, the best players, are actively recruited. Sometimes it’s the lower level coaches who visit the recruit or calls them. Sometimes (in the case of the top recruits) it’s the head coach himself who will contact them. The position isn’t posted on High School bulletin boards. There aren’t open tryouts (not for the key positions at least). The coaches get together and evaluate the talent. Then they pick the player they want – not just based on their resume, but on how they will fit in with the “system” the head coach has in mind. How well they fit in with the vision. The players’ attitude, work ethic, and potential are more important than what they’ve done or how others “rate” them.

Other players (walk-ons) are also solicited. They get to try out. They interview and then demonstrate they can perform the skills necessary. But even if they are proficient enough to “make” the team, they are evaluated for fit. Do they get along? Will they help the team achieve? Always we look toward the overall success of the organization and the vision of the head coach.

Develop your Players

Once the players (if you haven’t guessed yet – players are the equivalent of staff) are in the fold it is the job of the coaching staff to help them develop into the best players they can be – given the parameters of the system employed. It is NOT the job of the coach to do the job for them. Imagine, in the first game of the year, if the quarterback’s coach ran onto the field to play the position! No, the coach’s job is to teach, train, and prepare the players to excel. The players HAVE to still PLAY the game. They have to go on the court (or field) and get the job done. The coach many times is relegated to being a cheer leader, harsh critic, and provider of honest feedback. So, it is totally true – the most valuable asset on the team is the player. Since the coach can’t play the game, the most important job is to develop the players – holistically. Not just so they can perform. The coach has to be concerned with the player’s mental, physical and (dare I say) spiritual health! No wonder it’s hard to find a good head coach!

A Coach’s Responsibilities:

  1. Have a vision for the team
  2. Articulate that vision clearly and enthusiastically
  3. Build a great coaching team
  4. Recruit the best players which means players that fit the system/values of the organization
  5. Develop the players (Mentally, Physically, Spiritually). Teach and train them to successfully perform the skills necessary
  6. Cheer the players on
  7. Provide honest feedback
  8. Make corrections to player development when necessary (go back to #5 Develop Players)
  9. Prepare players for the next “level”
  10. Start all over again

After the Game is Over

When players don’t play well…or don’t follow the game plan – coaches take the blame. They don’t call out the player’s errors in public. Nope. The coach takes the blame for the team failing. And when the team wins the national championship? The coach gives the players all the credit!

I fully believe this analogy can be used for the entire work experience. We can learn a lot from other professions – especially ones which are so dependent on performance. Every organization I’ve been in has been concerned with performance, and perhaps none more than the US Air Force. BTW, I’d say for the most part the USAF follows this school of thought. Leaders are developed. Leaders develop their people. Leaders don’t micro manage or try to do the job for their people. Leaders don’t take credit for their people’s or the organization’s success. Not the good ones.

Leaders don’t “manage” people, or manage with data, or make data-driven decisions to enhance performance. Nope. It’s simple.

Leaders lead.