Acronym

“People Don’t Hate Change; They Hate How You’re Trying to Change Them”

Nothing could be truer. But that hating also applies to "how you're trying to motivate and manage them". This is extremely important because if people are managed correctly, they will not only not resist change, they will be eager to adopt necessary change.

Kanazawa discusses the bandaid to BPR of "buy-in" pointing out that "However, even if people accept the changes, they are often not operationally sound, due to the fact that the people who have to implement the solution weren’t really included in the design up front. There are often simpler solutions to meet the same objectives that weren’t considered. People who speak out at that point are labeled as non-believers and trouble makers."

How very true. The people at the bottom of the chain live with the company's problems every day and generally know far more about them than upper management. The top-down command and control approach to managing people fails because its decisions often bear no connection to reality since they are made in ignorance of what is really going on.

He then states that "Successful companies engage people much earlier in the front end of the planning process. When people are engaged up front and are a part of generating the tactical plans, there is no need to get “buy-in” at any point. The ideas are already theirs."

Not bad, but how about the routine. What happens to engagement in routine everyday events? Doesn't it work best then as well?

He cites a cement company's success - "That’s the power of engagement up front. When people are invited in to help solve tough business problems and have a big impact on the results, they become inspired, motivated and engaged. This approach to leadership unlocks power in the organization."

He then concludes that "Leadership impact is not about how aggressive,decisive, and visionary you are, it is about how you bring that out in others."

Now, that is real wisdom. Managing people is all about leadership because employees follow the boss' "leads" whether the boss wants it or not. And the boss' "leads" consist of everything the employee experiences in the workplace.

Later, Kanazawa states "There is a tremendous amount of creativity, ingenuity and determination that is untapped in companies."

This is the key issue since top-down naturally demeans, disrespects and demotivates employees thus denying the company their tremendous reserves of creativity, ingenuity and determination (commitment). The effect of this on productivity is huge, some say as much as 500% per person between being uncommitted and totally committed.

So what must we do routinely to harness this tremendous power?

In my humble opinion there are two major steps to take. First, get rid of all traces of a top-down approach. Everyone wants to do a good job, but don't want to be ordered around like a robot.

Next, start treating employees with great respect and not like robots by listening to whatever they want to say when they want to say it and responding in a very respectful manner. Responding respectfully means resolving their complaints and suggestions and answering their questions to their satisfaction as well as yours, but most importantly theirs. It also means providing them more than enough opportunity to voice their complaints, suggestions and questions. Spend your time making your support reflect the very highest standards of all values by resolving their complaints and suggestions thus "leading" toward the very best standards.

And realize that the highest quality and most respectful "direction" is the very least since no one likes to take orders or really needs them except in emergency situations. Anyone routinely needing extensive orders should not be on your team.

This treatment "leads" employees to treat their work, their customers, each other and their bosses with great respect. Listening and responding respectfully also inspires them to unleash their full potential of creativity, innovation and productivity on their work giving them great pride in it and causes them to love to come to work.

I was by the huge amount of creativity, innovation and productivity that was unleashed. To learn how I escaped top-down after using it for 12 years, read an interview of me at
http://www.extensor.co.uk/articles/int_simonton/interview_ben_simonton.html

Kanazawa did say on thing I disagree with strongly - "Think about this… is your goal to get the most out of people or the best out of people? You typically can’t get both."

You can get both, but you must convert your employees to being self-directed self-starters and they will give you the most and the best.

Best regards, Ben
Author "Leading People to be Highly Motivated and Committed"

The fundraising reference is a good one: very common-sensical. Even at our association foundation interest group gathering at the AFP conference earlier this year it was clear that many of us struggle with mastering the basics of fundraising--too often it is thought of as another form of marketing or sales, and we have to offer tangible benefits and 'push for the close.' Instead it's often the intangibles that lead people to give, and the necessary pressure is a subtle, peer to peer thing. Certainly recognition helps, but altruism, fulfilling a perceived organizational need, the desire to support the industry or profession, and the opportunity to demonstrate accomplishment and power within the field are factors lead us to give.

These drivers tend to lend themselves better for peer-to-peer asks. Staff can ask but may appear self-interested. For me, it's been interesting to make a transition from heading direct response for a mega-charity to being a consultant not working at all in fundraising, to now serving as a board member and fundraising chair for a charity in New York ... a good ED or Director of Development knows when to pull Board members like me into the mix to help get a 'yes,' but often individuals will give with minimal prodding. Adding additional effort/pressure often doesn't yield a larger or quicker gift, but rather tends to delay the decision, so I counsel patience, especially to be sure we don't ask too quickly. (Just like the fine art of getting buy-in, ensuring that giving feels like your own decision is critical, and at the end of the day it IS your decision.)

Took me a few years to figure out that fundraising is more of an art than a science but this quick reference definitely reminded me that often we gasp the nuances and intricacies of the subject matter of our associations far better than we understand the 'simple' basics of fundraising.