Today’s post was written by guest blogger, Jim Atwood, Director of Government Solutions at The Ken Blanchard Companies. Jim also presented on last week’s webinar, A Situational Approach to Leadership.

Last week’s webinar on taking a situational approach to leadership created a lot of discussion around the concept of mobile management.  Several participants related to the idea and shared their experiences with mobile management within their agencies.  I am most familiar with this type of management as it relates to the military… where a leader is usually only in a particular position for 18 months to 3 years.  However, following the webinar, I received several comments about how it also is a significant issue in other government agencies as well.  It was particularly evident with leaders who are in direct political appointee positions or those who report to political appointees. 

For me, mobile management is the planned periodic rotation of managers.  I know there are a great number of positive elements that can result from a well executed mobile management plan…unfortunately I have seen very few that were either well planned or well executed.  My experience has primarily been with individuals who, knowing that their position is short-term, have made immediate large-scale organizational changes to be able to “make their mark” on the organization.  Unfortunately, it appears that often the change was only for the sake of change…to be able to say that things were different from the previous manager.    The results of many of the changes I observed were rarely to enhance mission capability for the organization as a whole and often had a negative effect.   I recall one such individual who believed in this kind of change and said, “I like to really shake things up when I arrive…change everything.  I believe that dust settles at a higher level.”  He definitely shook things up but had a negative effect on morale and commitment to the command and its mission. 

I really am hoping that my experiences are not common…that I just had the bad luck of interacting with inefficient leaders initiating ineffective change.  But are my experiences the anomaly? 

What have been your experiences with mobile management?  How big of an issue is mobile management within the government?  What positive experiences have others had…and what were the resulting effects on the organization?

If you missed the webinar on taking a situational approach to leadership, you can still listen to the recording and hear more about how to lessen the negative impact of mobile management.

Jim Atwood, Director of Blanchard Government Solutions will be discussing how taking a situational approach to leadership can enhance your ability to effectively manage and develop your people and how that process can increase competence, commitment, and retention of your most talented individuals.

This webinar is free and seats are still available if you would like to join over 800 people expected to participate. Immediately after the webinar, Jim will be answering follow-up questions here at How Gov Leads for about 30 minutes. To participate in the follow-up discussion, use these simple instructions.

Instructions for Participating in the Online Chat

• Click on the LEAVE A COMMENT link below
• Type in your question
• Push SUBMIT COMMENT

It’s as easy as that! Jim will answer as many questions as possible in the order they are received. Be sure to press F5 to refresh your screen occasionally to see the latest responses. We hope you can join us later today for this special complimentary event courtesy of Cisco WebEx and The Ken Blanchard Companies.

View recording now!

Unfortunately, many supervisors utilize one approach to leadership that may seem to work for them, when in reality, it is not motivating their direct report. Leaders should tailor their leadership style to the situation. Adopting this approach increases open communication and fosters a partnership between the leader and the people the leader supports and depends on. Watch this short video on how you can implement a situational approach to leading your direct reports.

To hear more about leading with a situational approach, register to watch and participate on a live webcast with Jim Atwood, Director of Government Solutions for The Ken Blanchard Companies. The webcast will be on Thursday, February 2nd at 9:00am PST followed by a live chat with Jim here on How Gov Leads.

Empowerment is what leaders give to their people.

Today’s blog post was written by guest blogger, Doug Trainor, Consulting Associate with The Ken Blanchard Companies and Co-founder of Leadership Vanguard.

I know that many of you reading this might be Baltimore Ravens fans.  For those folks, I’m sorry about the playoff loss on Sunday.  I hope you will bear with me despite the fact that the leadership I am writing about comes from Tom Brady, quarterback for the Patriots.  After the Patriots win in the AFC Championship game Sunday, Brady was being interviewed and the reporter  mentioned how great Brady played, leading his team to a fifth Superbowl while he was quarterback—and tying a record doing so.  To which Brady responded, “I sucked today—fortunately the team did better than I did.”

Is that leadership? Yes! I think we need more of that type of leading in organizations across America—both public and private sector.  So please tell someone you were a poor performer today! It may sound a bit funny but there is something to it. A lot to it, actually. The first thing is candor.  We need candor to make our agencies and departments better.  Leaders address reality—even when it is tough to do and with upcoming budget pressures and the sometimes extreme political dialogues we hear on TV—candor will serve you well with those you lead.

The next quality Brady displayed with his comment was accountability. He took personal accountability for his performance and he did it publicly.  When leaders do this it builds credibility with those they lead and with the customers they serve.  It can be a powerful way to increase the trust in your organization. A side benefit is that makes it easier to give difficult feedback to people around you when you admit your own failings. Something that makes feedback easier?  Who couldn’t use some of that?

Last, but not least… it promotes humility.  Humility is a leadership quality that will serve you well in every way. Not thinking poorly of yourself; but realistically. And realizing our teams are the reason we succeed in our leadership roles and giving credit where it is due.

Perhaps the VA is on to something. A survey recently conducted by Federal News Radio to 49 chief human capital officers (CHCO) showed that most CHCOs are concerned with recruiting and retaining employees due to tight budgets and limited resources. VALU is proof that not all incentives to recruit and retain are monetary. The ability to grow professionally and personally is a coveted benefit at any agency. The Ken Blanchard Companies believes that individual learning is a key element to a high performing agency and is essential to self-leadership. Agencies that do not encourage people to learn are less likely to be high performing, because the skills of an agency are no greater than the skills of its people. When individuals learn, the agency learns. High performing agencies use formal training, mentoring, and on-the-job support to develop the skills and competencies of their people.

As a leader, why not help your direct reports make the most out of their learning experience.  Learn the six keys on how to ENGAGE your staff so they can apply what the learned in real-life work scenarios.

To bring out the best in others, leadership must match the development level of the person being led.

In order to improve performance management and efficiency, several federal agencies are using analytics to identify problems, identify progress, and share information and results. The Partnership for Public Service and the IBM Center for The Business of Government reviewed four agencies that are using data analysis to save money, improve services and more effectively achieve their goals. The agencies that were reviewed include Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Department of Veterans Affairs, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Each of these agencies is actively using analytical tools to determine the success of specific programs they have implemented. The agencies highlighted in the study shared certain practices that they all used to gather data and turn the information into knowledge that improved their program results:

• Leaders focused on transparency, accountability and results.
• Staff had a clear line of sight from where they stood to the desired goals and outcomes.
• Agencies invested in technology, tools and talent.
• Agencies cultivated and leveraged partnerships across the agency and with partners who deliver services.

Equally as important as the analytical tools used to improve performance management is the leadership style and direction managers use with their direct reports.

Leaders play a critical role in communicating a clear vision, setting expectations and calling for accountability for results.

Oversupervising or undersupervising has a negative impact on people’s development. That’s why it’s so important to match leadership style to development level. This matching strategy is the essence of Situational Leadership II®, a leadership model that delivers an effective approach to managing and motivating people. It opens communication and fosters a partnership between the leaders and the people the leader supports and depends on. SLII is based on the beliefs that people can and want to develop and there is no best leadership style to encourage that development. You should tailor leadership style to the situation.

Check out this fun video, narrated by Ken Blanchard, about how the right leadership can make a world of difference in your agency’s success.

You can also access the study on how agencies are using analytics to measure performance management and improve program success.

People often resent change when they have no involvement in how it should be implemented.

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) sent a memo from Director John Berry to agencies’ chief human capital officers that provided direction on buyouts, early retirement packages, and reassignments. The memo states, “The Federal Government is experiencing restructuring and downsizing in an increasing number of agencies. As a result, some Federal employees may ultimately find themselves in a position of having to transition to a new job.” Change is never easy for an organization. Involving employees in certain decisions that are influenced by change lessens the overall impact it could have on an individual and the organization. That is exactly what several agencies are doing in order to implement the instruction to plan a budget that is 5 percent below their spending levels in 2011. Government employees are being offered buyouts and early outs as a way to avoid potential layoffs and furloughs. In several cases, employees are given the option to be reassigned to another agency in order to continue their career with the government.

When change occurs, people initially focus on what they have to give up. Their first reaction to a suggested change often tends to be a personal sense of loss. This includes, among other things, the loss of control, time, order, resources, coworkers, competency, and prestige. To help people move forward, leaders need to assist them in dealing with this sense of loss. Helping employees get in touch with what they think they will be losing from the change will help them accept some of the benefits.

Check out this short video about how change needs to be a course of actions you do with people, not to them.

87% of employees reported that telework has a positive impact on their work/life balance.

Budget cuts government-wide have forced leaders to “do more with less” and focus on innovation within their agency. As a result of this, many senior executives are struggling to provide a work environment that incorporates high-performing teams, a work/life balance, and employee interest to stay with and support the agency long-term. A new report to the President and Congress by the United States Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) may be just the answer agency leaders have been looking for to address these concerns.

Research on workplace flexibility has found that not only does teleworking benefit employees, it also benefits the organization. The snow storm that hit DC in 2009 left many federal employees unable to get to their place of employment. The result of the forced shutdown was estimated at costing the government $100 million per day in lost productivity and opportunity costs. If agencies had a telework policy in place, employees would have had the opportunity to work from home or another easily accessible location to get their work done, despite the snow storm. In addition, agencies that allow their workers the option to telework are more apt to recruit and secure high quality employees due to the attractiveness of the work/life balance mobile working offers.

Telework; Weighing the Information, Determining an Appropriate Approach, U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, October 2011

If the government is requiring agencies to be innovative in light of the recent budget cuts, managers and supervisors need to provide incentives that will keep these high performing employees working for them. Teleworking is a benefit that would have a direct impact for employees by reducing commute times, freeing up more personal time after work, and empowering employees to work when they are at their most optimal. All of these factors have been found to empower and motivate employees and, in turn, increase performance and results.

Telework; Weighing the Information, Determining an Appropriate Approach, U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, October 2011

The Ken Blanchard Companies along with Training magazine conducted a survey to further explore how to create employee work passion. One question asked what influenced employees to remain with their organization the most. The survey conveyed several factors that impacted employees differently based on their work experiences. The factors that were ranked include:

Job Factors – Autonomy, Meaningful Work, Feedback, Workload Balance, and Task Variety

Organizational Factors – Collaboration, Performance, Expectations, Growth, Procedural Justice (process fairness), and Distributive Justice (rewards, pay, and benefits)

Relationship Factors – Connectedness with Colleagues and Connectedness with Leader

The research that was conducted reveals that employees are constantly making appraisals of their work experiences and these appraisals result in intentions to stay, to use discretionary effort, to perform at a higher than average level, and to endorse the organization and its leadership.

Want to learn about more ways to create an environment where people want to come to work and give their best? Log on to the live webinar at 9:00am PST/12:00pm EST today about cultivating employee work passion.

Agency support of career executives is critical.

You’ve finally made it! It’s your first day on the job as an executive leader and you may not realize it yet, but you are about to fail. This is the unfortunate outcome for 16 percent of Senior Executive Service members that were unsuccessful in completing their 1-year probationary period. Surprisingly, their failure is not due to a lack of expertise, motivation, or engagement; most were not offered an effective onboarding program. The Corporate Leadership Council found that there are five typical reasons that executives don’t succeed:

• They fail to establish a cultural fit
• They fail to build teamwork with staff and peers
• They are unclear about the performance expected of them
• They lack political savvy
• Their organizations do not have a strategic, formal process to assimilate executives into the organization

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) realizes the importance of effectively onboarding senior executives so they are set-up for success rather than failure. The OPM collaborated with the Senior Executives Association (SEA) and the Partnership for Public Service (PPS) to talk about what a productive executive onboarding program looks like. As a result of their efforts, OPM published a manual for agencies to reference when designing a program personalized for their new executives. The manual addresses the current problems with onboarding Federal leaders, why they fail, and how they should adjust their existing program.

Leaders that are not prepared for what challenges they are faced with in their new role have an effect on more than whether they stay in their role or not. Ill-prepared leaders cost companies millions of dollars each year by negatively impacting employee retention, customer satisfaction, and employee productivity. However, many change initiators fail to realize this impact and choose to do nothing to remedy the problem. The Ken Blanchard Companies has come up with a free online calculator that measures the cost of doing nothing. This tool has helped companies realize that the longer they wait to make these important changes, the more ineffective their agency becomes.

Learn more about common challenges that today’s leaders face.

Manage the journey of change rather than announce the destination.

Budget cuts are being implemented government-wide.  Agency leaders are currently faced with continuing to manage the day-to-day functions of maintaining a successful organization while upholding the morale and motivation of their employees. Change can be a significant struggle, especially when dealing with less and expecting more. The Partnership for Public Service along with Booz Allen Hamilton published a study that focuses on how government agency leaders can continue to guide employees and maintain a functional workforce while having to cope with large budget cuts. Over 30 senior-level federal employees were interviewed for the study.  Those individuals shared eight strategies that were successful for the agencies they worked for back in the 1990s, when they were faced with major budget cuts and reductions in the number of federal employees, yet were expected to do more with less.

The eight strategies that were shared could not be successful without four conditions; requirement of top-level leaders to make difficult decisions and share the vision with employees, ability to plan ahead and be prepared with how to respond to inquiries, experience to decide how to best apply the strategies for the agency, and apply a functional change-strategy that would minimize the adverse implications of the reductions. Those eight strategies include:

1. Across-the-board cuts – decrease programs or functions equally
2. Programmatic cuts – reductions based on importance or efficiency
3. Decreasing administrative costs – cut overhead without weakening workforce
4. Personnel reductions – cost-savings through attrition and/or forced layoffs
5. Consolidating or centralizing functions – hope for greater efficiency
6. Reengineering – improve service quality with awareness of upfront resources required
7. Investing in information technology (IT) – increase productivity and efficiency
8. Outsourcing – assign functions to external organizations at a lower cost

Constant change is a way of life in organizations today. Like it or not, in the dynamic society surrounding today’s organizations, the question of whether change will occur is no longer relevant.  Change will occur, budgets will be cut, and resources will be limited. How do leaders cope with the barrage of changes that confront them daily as they attempt to keep their organizations adaptive and viable? Developing strategies to listen in on the conversations in the agency so that they can surface and resolve people’s concerns about change is a great place to start. They have to strategize hard to lead change in a way that leverages everyone’s creativity and ultimate commitment to working in an organization that’s resilient in the face of change.

With the recent budget cuts, how is your organization dealing with the impactful changes?

Read the full report from Partnership for Public Service, Making Smart Cuts.