Thoughtful leadership and marketing

I was fired!

I have been fortunate the past six years to be coached by Joe Friel, whom many believe, me included, ranks among the greatest coaches in endurance sports.  His books have mentored hundreds of thousands of athletes in the sports of cycling, running and triathlon, and his work stands as the ultimate training bible.

Under Joe Friel, I transformed from an over-trained, average, “not strategically brilliant” athlete to someone who learned how to get the most out of his aging, average body.  I was named a triathlon All-American for the very first time under Joe’s direction, an accomplishment we repeated for four consecutive years before Joe suggested I give up triathlons and concentrate on cycling, a decision I have fallen in love with and where we managed two bronze medals in Wisconsin Road Racing.  The chances I would have accomplished any of that without Joe as my coach are zero as I had been trying unsuccessfully, before I met Joe, for 16 years. 

He also transformed my body and my diet, I eat like a caveman now, and did I mention he is one of the nicest guys in the world.  Going to a triathlon with Joe Friel is like being in a very public place with a rock star (Note: I’ve never actually been in a public place with a rock star, not counting when the rock star was on stage and I was in the audience, but I’m using my imagination here).

Last week Joe called for our weekly consultation and essentially fired me proclaiming I had been an excellent student and I had learned his methods and systems to a point where I could now do this on my own.  Because of the high demand for his limited time he does charge a premium for his personal one-on-one coaching and under those circumstances I realized, painful as it was, he was right. 

On June 4 of this year I wrote a blog called “Terminating relationships is a leader’s challenge” and said that good reasons for termination occur when either party has changed or grown.  Joe is a great leader and classic entrepreneur and recognized that I had indeed changed under his coaching from the over-trained, one speed (all-out) the entire time, to a more enlightened athlete. 

Joe is testament to the benefits of personal coaching and the gains you can make by hiring an expert with experience to work with you, be it sport or business.  When I first approached Joe and asked if he would be my coach he rejected me because I was a vegetarian (and had been for 17 years) and he said he didn’t work with vegetarians, as they didn’t respond well to his coaching program.  He was willing to walk away from a client because of his values.  That made an impression on me to the point where I agreed to eat dead animals for the next six years so he would agree to be my coach.  He was right about the body's need for animal protein and just about everything else he taught me. 

Like a good leader he never used the "march or die" method, rather he often gave me choices like, "You can go on the 100-mile bike ride the week before the world triathlon championships but I wouldn't recommend it."  I did not go on the 100-mile bike ride (I rode 70 instead) and ended up 12th in the world and the first American finisher in my age group.  I should have biked even less because I was tired at the end of the race and dropped steadily from a higher position.  Whenever I went against his advice I paid a price and learned early in the relationship to listen to the man all of the time. 

But alas, “the man” is gone and I am on my own.  A little scary, but at the same time I love new life experiences.  Change is my drug of choice (see Chapter 30 in Celebrating Failure).  Whenever I brought a consultant to my company I often had to wean some of my associates off of the consultants after they had left.   My associates would ask, “Should we call Toni and ask him what he would do?”  Well we could, but don’t you think it is time we took what Toni worked so hard to teach us and run with it?  Or in this case, cycle with it. 

How do you get management and workers pulling in the same direction?

Here is another reader-submitted rule of the unwritten worker-inspired variety:  “I worked on a drill press machine.  I was drilling holes into narrow steel plates used for pull levers in vending machines.  At the end of the day I had drilled holes in over 1,000 steel plates.  When I was about to register the number of drilled plates into the log, I noticed the previous logged numbers were much lower, averaging about 375.  

One of the union members who was working close to me rushed over, saw my number, and was visibly shaken.  He made it very clear that in the future I needed to stay close to the lower numbers so that I didn't get any union members in trouble.

Because of the intimidation, I found myself complying with their unwritten rule of slacking off and working at half speed.”

This was submitted from the memory of a boomer looking back on his first entry into the real world.  It is the kind of anti-union story we have all heard.  Is there a modern day version of planned group mediocrity in today’s business environment?  Whenever there is an 'us against them' work environment there is an opportunity for both groups to not work up to their potential.  Most situations no longer rise to the level of worker harassment described above.  But if you don't understand what each other is trying to accomplish there is room for improvement.

Today’s enlightened modern manager needs management and workers on the same page.  The best way to do that is to share financial information or to create an open book company.  If you make workers aware that if they produce more products at a better price, they will win more bids for their work, and you will be able to pay them higher wages.  Everyone has to deliver on both the piece work goals and the promise to share increased profits. 

I have worked in both open and closed financial environments and it is far more fun and collaborative to work in an open environment where everyone has a clear picture of company goals and everyone is pulling in the same direction.

Mentally labeling coworkers can negatively impact our ability to hear them.

A drunken man who smelled of alcohol sat down on a subway next to a priest. The man's tie was stained, he had lipstick on his collar, and a half-empty bottle of gin was sticking out of his torn coat pocket.  He opened his newspaper and began reading.

After a few minutes the man turned to the priest and asked, "Say Father, what causes arthritis?"  The priest replies, "My son, it's caused by loose living, being with cheap women, too much alcohol, contempt for your fellow man and lack of a bath!"

The drunk muttered in response, "Well, I'll be damned," then returned to his paper.

The priest, thinking about what he had said, nudged the man, "I'm very sorry.  I didn't mean to come on so strong.  How long have you had arthritis?"

The drunk answered, "I don't have it.  I was just reading here that the Pope does."

That story reminded me how our perceptions about people we work with affect the way we hear what they say.

When radio talk show host Don Imus returned to the airwaves after his poorly conceived remarks about the Rutgers' women's basketball team, the radio station started getting complaints that Imus was dropping the F bomb on listeners.  This was of course untrue.  But Imus had been so demonized by the national media that listeners simply perceived he was saying the F word. 

Have you ever put a coworker in a box because they often proposed a similar solution to every problem your company encountered?  I worked with a salesperson who often wanted to cut the rate to make a sale.  So when the poor guy actually proposed a new and totally unique solution to a sales problem that didn’t involve rate cutting, no one heard him because we all perceived he was saying the same thing he always said about rate cutting. 

The lessons to be learned are on both sides.  Try not to put people in a box before they speak and you might find they have new and interesting things to say that you would have missed had you screened them mentally before they spoke.

And don’t be that guy who is put in the box.  Keep people off balance with new and different solutions.  Catch yourself before you keep going back to that same old "one trick solution well” one more time. 

Men and women have different leadership philosophies.

The difference in leadership styles between men and women is remarkable, yet little is written on the subject.  I have a mild death wish today so I thought I'd either go outside and juggle grenades or write this blog about the difference in the way men and women approach leadership.  I have two female business partners and it is interesting, and fun frankly, the way we come together in strategic decision making. 

We recently had a client who was concerned with the way we handled a specific approach to branding.  So I volunteered to call the client and suggest that we had learned they had some questions about our specific branding philosophy and we'd like to come over and sit down and openly and honestly discuss our differences.  A typical male...hunt, kill, direct solution.  See problem, attack problem, kill problem.

My two female associates nodded politely and acknowledged that my idea would certainly be one way of handling the situation.  A standard operating procedure we use to politely acknowledge the objection and then suggest the solution we really want to implement.  It is hard to con a con.

And as usual, their idea was a good one.  They agreed I should call the client (they liked that part of me doing the calling) but instead of being specific with the client's objection, they thought it would be best if I suggested we meet and talk philosophically about branding in general and eventually the objection would come to the surface.  It fit perfectly with the oftentimes-female stereotype of playing nice together until the issue is eventually addressed.

Outnumbered and outgunned I caved and agreed to try it their way as I confess it is a less confrontational way to approach the issue.  It is a slower and more patient tact, but we should be able to get there just the same.  I dutifully made the call and suggested the big picture summit and they agreed to meet. 

I know there will be times in the future where a direct approach will be superior and I'm sure they will agree with me.  It is enlightening to stay open to the differences in the way men and women approach and solve problems.  We both can learn great things from each other.