Team Roles

Life in the Navy is all about team work. As we learn about the phases of team development I conjure up many examples of how I have been an active participant in several important teams. If one thing is constant about the Navy it is the fact that teams will always be changing. Established players transfer. New members arrive, and the dynamics constantly change. But one thing is for certain, how well we operate as a team can mean the difference between mission success and mission failure.

When I came to the Eisenhower in October 2012 I had absolutely no sea-time experience. Carrier life is unique and challenging, and as I quickly learned... fast paced. I flew out to meet the ship in the Arabian Gulf. The ship had been out for 4 months of a 9 month deployment, and the CATCC (Carrier Air Traffic Control Center) was in a state of flux with several new team members. I was the last E5 to arrive, and out of 5 new check-ins we had a combined sea-time experience of 4 months.

I quickly had to learn my way around the ship, my role as an E5, and the expectations my leadership had for me. No one seemed to be on the same page, and morale was low. I also learned very quickly that the junior Sailors knew everything I needed to know regarding ship-board life.

I actively engaged my junior guys and immersed myself in every task I would be required to supervise. I spent any extra time I had learning how to control airplanes at sea. Basically, I spent my first two months of deployment establishing a good working relationship with my small division.

Because I had shown my team I was willing to do whatever was asked of me I gained favor within the division. I became accessible for my shipmates to come to with problems and helped them find solutions. Slowly we began to see an improvement in the shop. As I became more comfortable in my many roles we developed a cohesion as a team.

By the end of our deployment our crew knew just about everything there was to know about each other. We depended on each other and worked well together. We could see when the stresses of underway life wore us down and we filled in the gaps to give others breaks. Our communication was solid, and we completed our mission with pride.

Being part of a team means understanding yourself as well as the other individuals. Working towards a common goal requires a lot of patience and effort. However, once the dynamics are established and the team is functioning effectively there is really nothing that can stop the positive momentum. I enjoyed my time at sea with the Ike, and it was because of our combined team accomplishments that I will never forget that deployment.

Forrestor's Empowerment

Anywhere you look in today's corporate structure you will find those who are authorized to make the final decisions and those who aren't. The authority to act is generally reserved for those in management positions. This authority is power, and power is the ability to make things happen.

Since the 60's a revolution of corporate structure has been developing. Many ideas and theories have been  tossed around to increase productivity, create happy employees, and distribute the power to make decisions. One of these ideas is the concept of Empowerment.

Cameron and Whetten define empowerment as a means to provide freedom for people to do successfully what they want to do. Russ Forrestor defines it as a more exacting involvement that implies the freedom and ability to make decisions and commitments, not just suggesting them or being a part of making them. Both of these definitions require distributing power from one source (those who have it) and empowering another (those who don't).

In theory, empowering the front-line seems legit. The producers who are making the wheels turn in an organization know what's good for the company right? They should know how much things cost and be able to just buy them. They should decide who gets hired and fired, right? I mean they are working next to these people... who would know better than them? Give the power to the people and we all live in a Utopia.

Wrong!

Empowering only works when power is EARNED. It is about enhancing the responsibilities associated with power. It would take a great deal of training to prepare someone to accept empowerment effectively. Without proper preparations, knowledge, skills, and/or ability empowerment simply does not work. It can not be just a social concept.

Let's consider this... would Dale Earnhardt Jr. empower his pit crew to drive his car in the Daytona 500 just because they can change a tire, or overhaul an engine? No Way! Would they let Dale jump behind the Pit Crew and run out there with a fuel can on a pit stop? Probably not? Why? Because without the knowledge, training, and skill levels required to be effective the results will probably not be what was intended, or expected (and probably down right disastrous!)

The bottom line is this: Competence is Power. To achieve empowerment there has to be a certain level of competency. Forrestor makes a great point with this thought, "those who establish a surer expertise gravitate toward greater responsibility, and it gravitates towards them". Obviously, there is much work to be done to truly fine-tune this entire concept. However, in theory... power should be attainable as long as the knowledge, skill, and general know-how are there to wield it once it is attained.

JP

Cameron, K., & Whetten, D. (2012). Developing management skills. (8 ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.

Forrestor, R. (2000). Empowerment: Rejuvinating a potent idea. The Academy of Management Executive, 14(3), 67-80.

 

Motivation Beyond Money

This week's topic is on motivation. It is important for us as leaders and followers to understand first what motivates us, and second what motivates our people. What is it that motivates us at work, or in our personal lives? Is it money? Are we challenged enough? Are we happy?

Andy Mulholland of SkillSoft Ireland Limited stated three key motivations that foster an efficient working culture, or environment in organizations. These three concepts are offering interesting work, expanding a skill set, and recognizing the achievements of the individual. It is interesting that Andy doesn't include monetary values as one of the key elements of motivation. In fact, he states that money is not enough to keep an employee engaged. He believes that if an employee is engaged in work that is interesting, improving his/her skill set, and being recognized for their achievements they will find their own motivation that transcends monetary values.

Ironically, this week's lesson comes at a time where I am exploring options for employment outside of the Navy. I am currently in the last year of my contract and actively researching industries that I would want to work in when I get out. When I ask myself what is important for me to make such a drastic change in my life I find my answers are clearly aligned with Andy's assessment.

Now, I do have some serious responsibilities to provide for my family, but as I am considering this option or that option I try to see myself in that environment. Would I be happy working as an airport manager in the long run? Do I want to get back into sales and struggle through the peaks and troughs of commissions? Do I see myself as a "suit" in the energy industry? The bottom line is... will I be happy in my choices. I believe that if I can answer in the affirmative I will be happy with the amount of money I bring in.

A wise friend, and successful entrepreneur Patrick of Rainbow Play systems once told me it is hard to carve out a living doing what you love, but if you learn to love what you do you can exceed your financial expectations. At the time he told me this I was studying theater in college with aspirations of  making it in the movie/film industry. I loved to perform. My love for this craft almost blinded me to the harsh facts of that industry. For every big-name star on today's silver screen there are hundreds (if not thousands) of other actors with equal or better talent waiting tables hoping for their big break. Was it impossible? No. Would it have been difficult to succeed... probably. However, Patrick also gave me a break selling his playgrounds where I learned a valuable skill, was challenged each and every day, and made more money than I had ever before. I really learned to love that job and the art of selling. I loved it so much that I absorbed any and all reading material I could on the subject. I had to establish, in my life, what I am good at and what I wanted to be good at.

There are a few things that I will not sacrifice when (and if) I take a new job outside the Navy. First, I want to be able to make a difference. I want to be able to help a company grow, meet their objectives, and cultivate those around me. Second, I want to learn a new trade. I jumped from sales to air traffic control for the Navy, and I know that my combined experiences can be a huge asset in learning a new trade. Whether it is at an airport, working for an airline, or in the energy industry I want be able to continue my quest for self-improvement and knowledge base. Finally, I want to help others grow and exceed their own needs. I have been apart of several organizations that fostered mentorship as a means to cultivate their employees. I absolutely loved that! I had mentors grab me up and say "do this, kid, and you will have more than you ever thought possible here". In turn, when I was in management I did the same for those who I supervised. I saw people who really wanted to improve themselves, and nothing made me happier than helping them accomplish their goals.

All in all, I believe that if I can find a balance between my work, personal, and spiritual lives I can find happiness. The money will come after the balance can be attained.

JP

Supportive Communication

As a Watch Commander for the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower's Security Division I oversee approximately 45 individuals from different shops and rates. Most of us, including myself, have been sent from our parent divisions and jobs we have been groomed to do to serve a year as patrolmen. Because most of us have little to no prior security experiences our challenges are considerable. One lesson I have learned that has helped effectively manage my people is that open and honest communication is the key to success.

Our text describes this concept as supportive communication. This blog will take a close and personal look at my self-appraised skills in supportive communication, what I feel I do well, and areas of improvement.

Page 265 of our book Developing Management Skills outlines several behavioral guidelines to improve supportive communication. Using these guidelines I can gain a good idea of my skill set. First, I can start with Coaching versus Counseling.

It is a fine line between knowing when someone needs coaching or counseling. My personality type leads me towards finding solutions to problems, so when I see one I typically try to find a way to fix it. Now, especially with managing my team's personal conflicts and issues, this can be tricky for me. Most of the time issues and complaints just need to be spoken and unloaded to someone who will listen. This requires counseling and understanding a problem, not just finding a solution. Although, when I counsel people I may offer options to help out, but usually I tend to just hear them out. When I see deficiencies in work performance, appearance, or attitude I may need to put on my coaching cap and redirect the behavior in a more positive direction. Overall, I need to listen more and react less. Most of the time people can figure out their own solutions when they feel free and safe sharing their issues with someone they trust.

Communicating congruently is an area I feel I excel in. I have always been a person who says what they mean and means what they say. Rarely do I stray from this philosophy. I believe a person's words should reflect their feelings. I haven't had many instances where my words and actions are not congruent.

Being descriptive for me is something I learned in sales (pre-Navy). I found that by restating what other people say helps clarify the meaning. By describing an event, problem, or issue and then isolating it it is easier to offer viable solutions or alternatives. This is almost second nature for me.

Using problem-oriented statements is what I consider the PC approach to resolving discrepancies. Singling out the problem areas and not personal traits softens the approach and helps to alleviate someone feeling as though they are being attacked. "These are the issues I have a problem with" is better than "I don't like it when you do this...". This approach shifts focus to the problems, not the people.

Using validating statements is also a skill I learned as a salesman. Genuinely being open to others' thoughts and ideas builds value in them. My grandfather once told me I have two eyes, two ears, and one mouth for a reason. It is important to listen and observe more than it is to dominate a conversation with words. I feel I am a fairly good active listener.

Being specific versus global when making statements has helped me define what we have control over and what we do not. I love using this as a means to offer possible solutions to problems. Often, we focus to much attention on what we have absolutely no control over. This is a waste of time and energy and never really solves anything. Being specific in communication narrows down our focus and keeps us on track.

Own your statements. I have been told before to share all of the credit with my team and accept all of the blame for their failures. This is a global concept of leadership. When explaining to my higher-ups I always give the team credit for something good, but I always accept responsibility for our shortcomings.

Finally, an area which I can see plenty of room to improve is in regularly interviewing my people. I need to make a better effort to keep tabs on their goals, wants, and needs. The best way to do this is ask them on a one-on-one basis. I feel if I make more of an effort to connect with my guys, if even once a month or so, I can foster a better working relationship and understanding of them. After all, this is the ultimate purpose of supportive communication.

In the end, I do have some areas where I can improve on supportive communication with my team. I do feel I consistently exhibit most of these behavioral guidelines, and there is always room to grow. I believe that the better communicator I am with my guys the better they will be when it is their time to lead a team of their own.

JP

Decision Making

There are a few words that come to mind in regards of my personal decision-making process. This blog will examine the words I feel best fit this process, their antonyms, and any benefits to decision making using their relative concepts.

When I make decisions, of any magnitude, I believe the words fair, firm, and strategic best fit my approach. Antonyms to these words are unjust, yielding, and insignificant.

I believe it is important to be fair when making decisions. Outcomes, however, may not be fair as a result, but taking into consideration all aspects and consequences of decisions is important as a leader. "For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction" ~ Sir Isaac Newton. This applies to actions as a result of making decisions. Objectively considering these possible outcomes and then acting on the best solution can be a tough aspect of being a leader. Tough decisions need to be made, and sometimes the results may not be desirous for all parties involved. However, being fair, to me, means accepting all angles of a problem.

I have never appreciated "flip-floppers". Being firm and standing behind your decisions is tremendously important to me. Making rash decisions without all the necessary information can be a bad idea, but once a decision is made and action is implemented you need to be willing to stand fast in your resolve. A wise man once told me a smart man is quick to make a sound judgement and slow to change his mind. Standing firm shows resolve and confidence. This concept does not eliminate the need to reassess decisions if new information is presented or outcomes aren't what was expected. Fluidity plays a part in progress, but making decisions based on sound information and sticking to them are what separates good leaders from the bad.

Being strategic in decision making goes hand-in-hand with both being fair and firm. The difference of strategic decision making is understanding the effects the outcomes will have. Everything should move towards efficiency and stray away from chaos. Making strategic decisions should have a positive effect on those involved. Decisions should help move organizations, teams, and individuals in the right direction for the greater benefit of the whole.

Considering a decision-making process using the antonyms of fair, firm, and strategic would produce decisions that are unjust, yielding, and insignificant. This sounds to me like the actions of a self-centered, self-absorbed, tyrant. Life is too short to be lead by such a person.

There is very little middle ground between these words and their antonyms. You are either fair or unjust, firm or yielding, strategic or insignificant. I may not have all the answers all the time, or even the best decisions, but what I can try to do is be fair, firm, and strategic in my process. There is always a sound solution to the toughest problems. They just need to be uncovered and acted upon. Being fair, firm, and strategic seems to be a solid recipe for being a good leader, and more than that, it seems like the right way to make decisions.