Dear treasure readers,
Today all senses are addressed. That means there is something for visuals, readers and listeners.
Nugget #1 comes again from my blogging colleague Gregor Ilg. Last weekend there was a thread on Twitter to measure performance contributions:
Um den Ball aufzugreifen und weiterzuspielen: Selbst eine Niederlage kann ein wichtiges Puzzlestück auf dem Weg zur Meisterschaft sein. Zurück zur Ausgangsthese: Wofür messen wir individuelle Leistung eigentlich? https://t.co/PRRaSaSaYP
— Tobias Leisgang (@tobleis) September 15, 2018
Gregor took the ball for an impro-blog and transferred the annual performance reviews to the world of sport. No other than Tom Brady, the quarterback of the New England Patriots, has to bite the dust and receives his receipt for not achieving his personal goals in the year-end evaluation. In many companies he would then be delighted with a performance improvement plan in the following year. The team success, which in Tom Brady’s case is the win of the championship, becomes a minor matter. A very amusing contribution from Gregor, which makes you think. But why do we actually measure individual performance? I still don’t have a satisfactory answer to that question. Are we afraid that people will sit back and hide behind the performance of others? Or do we think that by measuring and improving individual performance we can improve overall performance? What do you think?
Performance Review for the ton (6 min, text, German)
Nugget #2 is a beautiful sketch note by Tanja Föhr. It’s about change and if we need to make all employees move. She drew the curve from diffusion theory, which many probably have seen before. I can only agree with her. When it comes to taking people along, I often use a journey as a metaphor. I imagine people standing at a bus stop. If the destination is attractive, people get on by themselves. Besides, not everyone has to ride along at the same time. Maybe it is not as nice at the destination as I thought. Why should everyone come on the bus at all? The innovators want to be there quickly and get on the plane. Others may arrive by bicycle.
Gestern mit Führungskräften:
„Wir müssen ALLE mitnehmen“
Ich:“Wie realistisch ist es, dass Sie ALLE mitnehmen? In % ?“
Antworten 30 -60%.
Ich: „Warum unterstützen Sie nicht im ersten Schritt die, die wollen? Und die mitmachen würden, wenn Zweifel beseitigt sind?“#agil #newwork pic.twitter.com/nEmLgm9g9h
— Tanja Föhr (@tanjafoehr) September 13, 2018
If the change still doesn’t work, then Nugget #3 will help. In the podcast by Vollmer & Scheffczyk, Benno Löffler introduces anti-patterns of change. When listening to the podcast, it’s as clear as day that it can’t work like this. Nevertheless, I’ve probably already run into all these anti-patterns. The first anti-pattern is still quite simple. You don’t solve a problem at all. Or at least none what would be particularly important at the moment. The second anti-pattern is about dynamic problems and copying solutions. This is happening right now in all curves and ends. For example, the Spotify model is copied in many companies. Most often, however, we probably see the third anti-pattern, the separation of thinking and acting. In the workshop a solution is invented. This is then given to the rest of the organization for implementation. Unfortunately the solutions to many problems do not pass the reality check. The link to Nugget #2 comes with the fourth anti-pattern. High performance companies assign the problem solution to the talents for the respective question. These talents will voluntarily take over the implementation.
I like the way Benno describes modern management. I can only warmly recommend the remaining podcast episodes to you.
05: ANTI-PATTERNS OF CHANGE (13 min, audio, German)
That’s it again for this week. If it wasn’t enough text for you this week, you can download the latest release of my book The Art of Collaboration.
Enjoy your weekend,