Working Smarter to Increase Productivity

Is there a connection between working smarter and greater productivity? How do we actually work smarter anyway, and why don’t we do it all the time instead of when we’re forced to do it?

In spite of the current economy with rampant corporate downsizing, there are signs that most companies will actually improve their productivity in the near term. According to a recent survey, a clear majority say their firms will work smarter and that this will come about through improvements in work processes. These were the conclusions of a study by the Institute for Corporate Productivity (i4cp) and HR.com who surveyed top executives as well as lower-level managers and supervisors in January 2009.

According to the survey, 86% of respondents said “there will be an increased emphasis on productivity” over the next six months. This greater focus on productivity has already panned out according to numbers released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) of the U.S. Department of Labor, which stated that in the fourth quarter of 2008, productivity in the nonfarm business sector rose 3.2%. It also rose 2.8% for the entire year, which was the highest growth rate since 2004.

So just how do we work smarter? Should all workflow processes and procedures be subject to a rigorous test to find and fix inefficiencies? Are these inefficiencies all that universal and easy to detect? I suspect not and therefore external efficiency experts and consultants should be in high demand. After all, if inefficiencies were easy to detect and correct, these would be taken care of by the people inside the companies.

Half of those surveyed also cited that there will be greater effort and engagement by employees as well as more effective workforce management. Organizations are trying to further engage employees at the same time as they make these work processes more efficient. And one could argue that you can’t have one without the other. If employees feel they are working as efficiently as possible, they very likely will feel more highly engaged in their work. On the other hand, if employees are highly engaged in their work, they may very well find ways to improve—given the opportunity—work process efficiency. It is this symbiotic relationship between engaged employees and the efficient work process that all companies should be seeking.

Working smarter should be more than just choosing to correct an existing inefficient process, but as a new philosophy for approaching each and every workday. For example, working smarter could mean choosing to look at your email inbox only two or three times a day instead of constantly reacting to whatever message zaps your attention from completing the task at hand. You may be in a position to do this with your phone as well. One could also choose to hold or attend meetings only when they are conducted in a manner that is highly productive. For those who bring their laptops to meeting to get other things done at the same time, they might question the widely held belief that multi-tasking really is more efficient than fully focusing your attention on one thing at a time.

For a sustained rise in productivity, working smarter must become more than just a convenient phrase for leaders to tell shareholders. Working smarter means organizations must embrace the notion of helping to fully engage their employees and provide them with the opportunity to influence their work processes. The resistance to change is very powerful, however, so it will take strong leadership and commitment to see that these improvements are driven throughout the organization and remain in place.

Mark Craemer                               http://www.craemerconsulting.com

Five Major Pitfalls for Leading Effective Work Groups

Building high performing work groups is important for all organizations, but achieving them is easier said than done. For the sake of this discussion, an effective work group depends upon whether the output meets the quantity, quality and timeliness established, how well the process of the work can be carried out by the individuals interdependently in the future, and whether the group experience contributes to the growth and well-being of the individual members.

To be an effective work group leader involves creating favorable performance conditions for the group (either on one’s own authority or by exercising influence upward or laterally with colleagues), building and maintaining the work group as a performing unit, and coaching the group as it evolves.

Work groups can be ineffective for many reasons, and it’s important for a leader to first recognize the nature of the problem. For instance, is the difficulty due to a lack of effort, inappropriate talent or a flawed strategy? Each of these areas would require a different intervention in order to make the team more effective.

The best way to keep a group from becoming ineffective in the first place is to avoid these five major pitfalls:

1. Work group in name only. When people are told they are a team but treated as individual performers, this sends a mixed message. This is also untenable as individual goals are likely to trump group goals. The team’s very existence is to achieve group goals, and it is therefore vital to emphasize that there is no “I” in the word team. Make it clear that all individuals will prosper only when the team prospers. Encourage team building activities that build trust and open communication between every member. Acknowledge and reward team achievements as well as encourage collaboration among individuals.

2. Lack of authority, responsibility and accountability. Managers should insist on exercising their authority with regard to the direction and constraints on group behavior. With clear direction, the team can align their efforts with the objectives of the larger organization. Ideally, group leaders should define the outcomes they are looking for and then give the team the flexibility to accomplish them on their own. By providing clear direction, the team can then choose the appropriate performance strategies. This can often generate and sustain energy within the team.

3. Inappropriate structure. Groups that have appropriate structures tend to develop healthy internal processes, whereas groups with inappropriate structures tend to have process problems. It is crucial to have the right people in the right roles, but without the right structure around these roles, the process breaks down. A leader should assemble a group of people in the correct roles and provide a structure that is suitable to contributing to them accomplishing the work at hand.

4. Inadequate support. If you specify challenging team objectives but skimp on organizational support, the team is bound to fail. The full potential of work teams can be realized only when organizational structures and systems actively support competent teamwork. And this must be done in deeds as well as words. The potential of a well-directed, well-structured, well-supported team is tremendous.

5. Limited training and coaching. It is helpful for leaders and managers to provide some hands-on training and coaching as group members develop the skills they need to work well on a team. Favorable times for this intervention include when a group is first launched, when it reaches a natural break in its work, and when it has completed its product or reached the end of a performance period. Providing adequate training and development ensures the continuation of the team’s performance.

Being an effective group leader involves (1) creating favorable performance conditions for the group with appropriate structure, accountability, and support, (2) building and maintaining the team as a performing unit by encouraging collaboration, open communication, and trust, and (3) coaching and helping the team in real time with appropriate training and development.

When all three areas are focused on, a group leader can help avoid the five major pitfalls and help their work group prosper.

Mark Craemer       http://www.craemerconsulting.com

Turn Signals and Talk Signals

In the same way not using a turn signal can frustrate other drivers, failing to use language to clearly convey your intent equally confounds listeners. This lack of clarity may lead to road rage and accidents on the road and, in workplace conversations, can result in confusion, missed opportunities, or even dismissal.

We have all experienced the driver in front of us who does not signal his or her intent by using a turn signal well before making a turn or changing lanes. In the chapter “Letting Others Know What You Are Doing” of the Washington Driver Guide, a turn signal is to be initiated at least 100 feet prior to a change in direction. In the case of changing lanes, I frequently experience a driver drifting over into my lane only to signal at the last possible moment. Why is this? What made the use of a turn signal so difficult or seem unnecessary?

A national survey conducted by an insurance company in 2005 found that 57 percent of drivers admit they do not use their turn signal. Respondents claimed they do not have enough time, are lazy, would forget to turn it off, change lanes too frequently to bother, or it is not important. Have we become less sensitive to the needs of those around us–even if it means risking the safety of ourselves and others?

Letting others know what we are doing or intending to do is perhaps just as important when trying to communicate with someone in the workplace. Think about a recent challenging relationship you had with an employee, co-worker or supervisor. When you speak with this person, how often does he or she really know your intention? Does this lack of transparency on your part lead to misunderstanding, conflict, or worse?

Much of our communication today is conveyed via email, text messaging, and clipped cell phone calls and these conversations are extremely condensed. It is easier than ever to misunderstand another person’s intent because the message delivery is more cryptic, coded, and abbreviated than ever before. Do emoticons help or only add to the confusion? The Subject line in an email message can certainly be helpful. Yet nonverbal clues are unable to assist us in decoding what has been stated. Without facial expressions, eye movements, and other body language, it is extremely easy to misunderstand or misinterpret the message being sent. So what it is to be done?

I have four suggestions that can be used and they should be conducted face-to-face whenever a communication breakdown is likely to occur.

1. State you intention clearly and directly. Ensure that the person you are delivering the message to understands why you are saying what you are saying. For example: “I’ve noticed that you’ve often been late to our staff meetings the past few months.” State specific behavioral information based on what you have observed. Next express your intent behind this. “I am concerned because this causes us to delay the start of the meetings.”

2. Look at the situation from the receiver’s perspective. The response might be: “Well, I try to get here on time, but I’m very busy these days.” Try to put yourself in his or her shoes by understanding the context from which your message is being delivered. What is this person’s mood, frame of mind, environment which could impact his or her ability to understand what is being said?

3. Use paraphrase to aid understanding. Ensure that you hear what the other person is saying by repeating back what you’ve heard. “What I hear you saying is that you are very busy and you are trying to be on time.” This will verify that you heard correctly. It will also demonstrate empathy to the other person and keep them engaged in listening to you.

4. Seek a win-win conclusion. Next you might state a personal statement as to why it matters. “It’s important to me that we are all here on time. Is there something I can do to help you make it to these meetings on time so that we don’t waste all of our time?” This makes it clear that you want to be a part of the solution.

Obviously, these four steps need not be used in every instance. However, using them when communication has gotten off-track can be the difference between clearly communicating and seriously derailing a conversation.

Mark Craemer   http://www.craemerconsulting.com

Employee Engagement in a Down Economy

When companies face challenging economic times, layoffs are often chosen as a viable way to reduce costs. In the short term, this makes the company’s balance sheet more appealing to shareholders and the company is more financially stable until the economy picks up again. In the long term, this workforce reduction can sometimes realign resources to increase productivity on the most important projects and jettison those projects that are unprofitable. Layoffs may therefore help a company become more efficient regardless of the economic climate.

However, layoffs can also create a great deal of stress among employees who remain on the job as they feel the loss of their coworkers and may be concerned that they are next. This sense of loss should not be minimized and should be acknowledged by upper management to demonstrate their own compassion for those who have lost their jobs. And a little bit of stress by those left behind is not necessarily a bad thing, of course, but if the stress keeps employees from doing their best work, it can be detrimental to the organization. In addition, those employees still on the job may have had their workload realigned and/or increased due to the reduced workforce, which further increases this stress.

In a typical workplace environment during the best of times, only 29 percent of employees are actively engaged in their jobs, while 71 percent are disengaged—either not engaged at all (54 percent) or actively disengaged (17 percent)—according to the most recent Gallup Management Journal’s Employee Engagement Index. In tough economic times when layoffs are present, this employee engagement is likely to be even lower.

Employee engagement activities can help reduce stress by demonstrating the organization’s commitment to the employees who remain on the job. It can also help employees feel more committed to the organization. A leader’s ability to articulate a shared purpose that complements the overall mission is critical for success going forward. And the most effective of these employee engagement activities result in management demonstrating clarity, connection, and collaboration.

When leaders clearly communicate a compelling vision for employees to embrace, people feel engaged in their work because they know where they are going. Employees are ready to follow a leader who knows where he or she stands and clearly communicates this. When employees know what the organization stands for, where it is going, what it wants to achieve and how they can directly contribute, employees are motivated to do their best work. This clarity among leaders is not always apparent and, during times of layoffs, needs to be especially so in order to reduce employee stress.

Leaders also need to connect with employees to show that they truly value them. This can be demonstrated in many formal ways, including profit-sharing, flex-time, and clear advancement opportunities with follow-through. But this connection should also include actions that are not directly related to the job and as simple as engaging employees in a conversation unrelated to their work. Simply getting to know and appreciating your employees as fellow human beings working to pay the bills, raise a family, and pursue a happy and productive life goes a long way in building trust. Also, what leads to true satisfaction for most employees is the credit they receive for the job they perform. When a leader credibly states that his or her employees are the organization’s greatest asset, this helps him or her connect. Exceptional leaders extend a great deal of recognition to others and they do this a lot. Ultimately, being cared about by colleagues is a strong indicator of employee engagement within an organization.

All good working relationships include trust and cooperation, which is a requirement for strong collaboration. Leaders can inadvertently discourage this collaboration with an overly competitive workplace where no one wants to share information for fear they will lose power or resources as a result. However, when leaders freely share information and encourage others to do the same, they can foster a collaborative environment that enhances employee engagement.

Most of these employee engagement activities do not require additional spending, however, some leadership coaching may be necessary to help further develop the ability to cultivate clarity, connection, and collaboration. Those leaders who use employee engagement activities such as these will go along way in reducing stress caused by layoffs and bring about lasting commitment among the employees who remain.