Rick Baker Thought Posts
Left Menu Space Holder

About the author

Name of author Rick Baker, P.Eng.

E-mail me Send mail
Follow me LinkedIn Twitter

Search

Calendar

<<  April 2024  >>
MoTuWeThFrSaSu
25262728293031
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293012345

View posts in large calendar

Recent Comments

Comment RSS

Command & Influence

by Rick Baker
On May 31, 2017

Some people possess a natural ability called Command. It is one of those natural-talent gifts. It provides a natural ability to magnetize, influence, and lead people.

But that natural ability can only be put to successful use if the talent of Command operates within 'fair' boundaries. And ‘fairness’ is an extremely subjective thing.

People have a very broad range of views about what is ‘fair’ in the area of Command and leadership. For example, Napoleon Bonaparte was either one of the greatest leaders of all time or he was the Antichrist. It all depends on your definition of ‘fairness’ [often moral fairness] as it relates to leadership. Most people have trouble seeing both sides of the argument and seeing both sides, of course, is essential if we are to truly understand let alone appreciate great leadership.

As a rule - With great strengths come great weaknesses.

Often, the most gifted leaders possess great flaws. If we choose to judge leaders by focusing on their flaws then we can generally find material flaws, deliver our harsh judgments, and diminish [at least in our minds] the truly gifted contributions of the leaders. Aside from satisfying our troubled egos, what good does that do? In my view, that delivers no value and misses the reality of leadership.

Leadership isn’t about perfection.

Leadership is about forerunning human excellence, with specific directions in mind and in action.

Leadership is about inspiring people and influencing people to follow.


PS: Napoleon Bonaparte is one of my heroes.

Tags:

Criticism: Constructive Criticism is an Oxymoron | Hero Worship | Influencing | Leaders' Thoughts

We are too tolerant of conflict!

by Rick Baker
On May 29, 2017

Are you better off following prescribed step-by-step conflict resolution processes designed by 'the experts' or drawing on your innate talents to resolve conflicts? Perhaps, for some people, there is merit in using someone else's detailed approach. However, how often have you seen that work in real life situations?

We should draw on our innate talents to resolve conflicts.

I have never seen canned processes for conflict resolution work in real life situation. We cannot be someone else so what would cause us to think we could use someone else's approach to conflict resolution? To the extent we find ourselves in situations of conflict we know we are at least partially responsible for our predicament [if not fully responsible]. We didn't follow someone else's steps when we walked our way into the conflict situation...so, we should not expect to be able to follow someone else's logical steps to find our way out of the conflict situation.

Often, we find ourselves in situations of conflict because:

1. we lack self-confidence and, as a result of that, we behave either too timidly or too aggressively and

2. we are too lazy to figure out how to avoid conflict or nip conflict in the bud when we know it has commenced.

We are too tolerant of conflict.

Some people even promote conflict in the workplace because they view it as a good, healthy, and productive way to communicate, make decisions, and delegate tasks.

That's interesting in many negative directions!

The results conflict promoters achieve at their businesses prove it is a high-risk-low-reward strategy. If that strategy ever worked it certainly has fallen out of vogue in recent decades. For example, under our Bill 168, we want people to feel secure at work. I expect Abraham Maslow would have supported this approach.

The reality is, some people – mostly people lacking self-confidence - either enjoy conflict with others or see it as a necessary component of work [and possibly life]. What can we expect from these die-hard conflict consumers and conflict distributors? Certainly, we cannot expect them to buy into following someone else's prescribed steps for conflict resolution. These people cannot follow such steps because they lack the innate talents required to avoid or resolve conflict.

And, if people possess the innate talents required to resolve conflicts then they can and should find their own natural ways to avoid and resolve conflict.

Either way, there is no need for experts to prescribe conflict resolution processes. These prescribed processes do not work because people either cannot follow them or do not need to follow them.

People need to understand themselves, work continuously at building and maintaining their self-confidence levels, educate themselves about innate talents and interpersonal interactions, and exercise self-control. These are the routes that lead to conflict avoidance and conflict resolution.

Seeing the Big Picture & Drilling Down, into the Details

by Rick Baker
On May 25, 2017

Strategic Thinking & Attention to Details: for a business leader, what's the right balance between these two things?

Some business leaders think they can soar around at 50,000 feet, never having to touch the ground let alone drill down into details. Sooner or later they learn, it can be a very quick trip from 50,000 feet to crash and burn.

Some business leaders think their attention to detail is so excellent they feel they must share the details with their followers repeatedly, every day...for almost every task. Sooner or later, they choke the spirit out of their followers, business engines stall, and another business death spiral begins.

Some business leaders operate between the two extremes, without giving any of this much thought.

 ***

Q: For business leaders, what is the right balance between strategic thinking and attention to detail?

A: The right balance needs to be customized to fit each leader's natural talents and the strengths the leader has developed through years of practice. It is important to plan the best balance rather than take an unplanned approach, allowing actions to unfold as they will during the heat of the business battles. One way a leader can determine his or her best balance is to approach the topic from a perspective laced with Seek Simple philosophies, one of which is - Business Contains Only 3 Things: People, Processes, and Situations

As you plan your approach to balancing Strategic Thinking versus Attention to Details, make sure you cover the People side first. Then, when you know the People side is covered, move on to the Process side. Why? People are very inclined to over-trump Processes....one way or another.

Consider your talents and strengths: I mean, seek professional help to make sure you have an accurate understanding of your talents [as Gallup tells us - talents are our natural ways of thinking and behaving] and your strengths [things you can do with mastery]. Again, cover the People side first, then move on to the Process side.

Know yourself, especially know how to put your relationships to best use and know your strengths [or lack of strengths] in the area of influencing your followers.

Envision how you will balance your strategic-thinking work with your attention to detail work...then go do it...and excel!

***

 

Being Right, Being Wrong, & other ways to Annoy People

by Rick Baker
On May 23, 2017

We can annoy other people so many ways...from being 100% right to being 100% wrong and pretty much everything in between.

It's relatively easy to understand why we annoy people when we are wrong. When we say and do wrong things people are annoyed because we let them down and we waste their time, etc.

It's relatively easy to understand why we annoy people when we stick to middle ground. People don't like indecision and they don't like wishy-washyness. People are impatient and they want answers.

And, I suppose for some folks it's easy to understand why we annoy people when we provide accurate answers, technically-right advice, and clear perceptions. Nobody likes a wise guy. Nobody likes a know-it-all. And sometimes all it takes is a right idea or an accurate piece of advice to trigger other people's self-defence mechanisms.

"Productive Communication": what an art form -

  • knowing when to bite your tongue just before it expresses something quite right but nonetheless doomed to be poorly received 
  • knowing when to bite your tongue just before it expresses something incorrect or stupid or otherwise wrong 
  • knowing when and how to take the time to formulate opinions that will inject Value into situations...helping others...without annoying them

Self-monitoring & self-control, the gifts that create a pleasing personality, a personality that -

  • does not annoy
  • inspires people
  • influences action
Inspire People - Influence Action - Generate Success
 
 
When you annoy people you don't make money...[unless you happen to be a sitcom actor or a Don Rickles clone]

Tags:

Communication: Improving Communication | Influencing | Personalities @ Work

Victors, Victims, Masters, Servants...a thought exercise

by Rick Baker
On May 22, 2017

Some people are perceived as victors: consider Olympic gold medalists, victorious over all competitors.

Some people are perceived as victims: consider pedestrians who are victims of hit-and-run drivers.

Some people are perceived as masters: consider the conductors of world-famous orchestras.

Some people are perceived as servants: consider the people who attend to the Queen of England.

The above are, at least, somewhat-extreme examples. I mean, few people would dispute these examples. There are of course 'textures' to each of these 4 labels: a range of victors, a range of victims, a range of masters, and a range of servants. 

In general, most people would consider victors and victims to be at the opposite end of one scale and masters to be the opposite of servant. That's the context I am thinking about here, I am thinking a person cannot be a victor and a victim at the same time. I am also thinking a person cannot be a master and a servant at the same time.

With that introduction...

Considering these four possibilities, how do you perceive yourself?

Where would you place yourself in the following picture?

How do you perceive yourself?

Do you see yourself as a Victor-Master?

Do you see yourself as a Victor-Servant?

Do you see yourself as a Victim-Master?

Do you see yourself as a Victim-Servant? 


 

More to follow...

Tags:

Attitude: Creating Positive Attitude | Influencing

Choose your Reaction to Errors

by Rick Baker
On May 18, 2017

It is fascinating to watch how people respond to errors at work. Reaction to errors, their own errors and other people's errors, tells you a lot about people.

I tend to look at it this way...


 

...and as I observe you: 

I think about Attribution Bias.

I think about how other people react to and what people learn from your reactions.

I think about the culture you are generating.

***

Oblivious to errors - Does anyone possess that mindset? [reminds me of Mr. Magoo]

A Balanced approach to errors - If you think that is your approach to errors then what, exactly, do you mean by "balanced"? What does it mean for your errors? What does it mean for other people's errors?

Extreme Criticism - What, exactly, does that mean? How do you apply criticism to yourself? How do you apply criticism to other people? Are you consistent when you apply extreme criticism?

***

Does your reaction-to-errors choice take you closer to your long-term goals? farther from them? no idea?

Or, perhaps, you do not believe you have a choice?

***

I believe successful people have 3 main attributes: Intelligence, Willpower, & Drive.

Do you think successful people react to errors the same way you react to errors?

Do you think successful people plan their reaction to errors? 

Do you think successful people learn from observing reactions to errors?

 

Copyright © 2012. W.F.C (Rick) Baker. All Rights Reserved.