schedule an annual review.
by steven e. sacks
the new fundamentals
earlier i discussed that engaging in what is considered conflict avoidance can undo the progress a firm has made. this can be because of complacency, frustration, intimidation or a host of other issues.
more: the great resignation or a reshuffling? | listen to learn | build the framework to a solution with five answers | try for success, not a win
exclusively for pro members. log in here or 2022世界杯足球排名 today.
some things are intuitively understood, but it’s those occasional sticky matters that tend to make situations unravel. establishing and keeping agreements helps to avoid confrontation: the one typically arising from someone promising to do something in a timely and complete manner and within a specified budget. even if the firm’s board casually agreed on a matter, something can go awry and threaten the direction of the firm.
if you want to ensure that confrontation is effectively addressed rather than avoided, make sure communications are clear, understood by everyone, and limit (even eliminate) loopholes to enable everyone to know his or her responsibility(ies).
“the best partnerships aren’t dependent on a mere common goal but on a shared path of equality, desire, and no small amount of passion.” – sarah maclean
it would be helpful to annually review all firm agreements, and if there are items that appear outdated because of growth, retirements or other factors, then invest the time to take a blank sheet of paper and build a whole new agreement. going through this exercise may result in the repeated lamentation of “how did we miss this?” or “how did we decide on that?” view this as a plus, not a negative.
how can you tell if an agreement is insufficient? here are some telltale signs:
- project assignments are not accompanied by hard and fast dates requiring compliance
- there is a lack of a plan b, c, d …
- ignorance of the necessary skills, resources and people to implement initiatives
- misunderstanding of firm priorities
- a culture that does not embrace the firm’s overall philosophy and allows for factions to operate unfettered
- an inaccurate judgment of the level of commitment of staff and leadership
- inability to assess whether an outcome is positive and in alignment with the firm’s overall strategy
will it work and does it make sense?
these questions should not be treated as mutually exclusive. my philosophy has always been to do the right things, rather than do things right. this means an action can be workable, but in the overall scheme of things, does the activity really add value to the firm?
then there are those individuals who will agree immediately; however, they will be quick to follow up with a “but.” this can throw a wrench into the spokes because there will always be someone who anoints him or herself the firm contrarian. look for the usual suspects early and often.
to avoid this predicament, create an assessment system or a matrix or whatever approach you want to use to uncover anything that appears out of alignment or discordant, whether it is aggressive timelines, shortage of resources or misinterpreted communications.
some simple steps to take
here are some easy-to-employ approaches that can avoid turning molehills into mountains:
- convey that mistakes are okay to be made as long as they are admitted and viewed as a learning experience so as not to be repeated.
- anticipate potential pitfalls and make adjustments so there is no harm inflicted on the firm.
- educate the lower-level staff on the importance of certain leadership tactics and approaches. experience is the best teacher, and these young professionals may someday be leading the firm.
- while clear communication is not always practiced, be sure you understand what you need from others and make certain they understand what you mean.
- avoid micromanagement, but be sure that bad habits that give rise to confrontations or abuse of power are treated with zero tolerance.
- don’t be afraid to challenge (not personally attack) anyone at any level when seeking to understand why a certain protocol or process is being employed.
these are just a few. i am sure you can discover other things for your own firm’s success. consensus requires tolerating (and encouraging) differing opinions, sharing of ideas and the ability to be flexible. any work environment needs this if it wants to experience continuous improvement and a positive culture.