Ask Bracher (Questions &
Responses)
Question: (E-241)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on May 31, 2006
"Pay attention to traits of women
leaders"
Recently, on KSBW's "Feedback at
Five with Theresa Wright" you discussed
the leadership effectiveness of women. Are you
suggesting that women are always better leaders than
men?
Response:
No. But, men do need to pay attention to methods effective
women employ. For example, how do women handle
stress? My observation about female leaders: "When
uncertain or perturbed, they keep their emotions not
too disturbed. They think, act and move on." Men,
in contrast, at least in too many instances: "When
in trouble, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and
shout. Men tend to react and later resolve." Obviously
stereotypes do not define the operating styles of all
men or women. But, they do challenge one-dimensional
leadership and suggest that intensity along with sensitivity
is a prudent option.
Both women and men can be more effective leaders when
they understand the value of different and complementary
operating styles. The phrase "my way or the
highway" sounds clever; but communicates a destructive
rigidity. Being alert to constructive criticism
can save many hours of debate and months of chaos. Men
and women are capable of significant achievement - especially
when they recognize that business knowledge
without interpersonal skills can create destructive friction. Equally
important is the awareness that comfortable working environments
without leadership and management expertise can create
nothing or chaos, or both. Combining business
knowledge and interpersonal skills is the integrity-centered
leadership combination for the future and the present. Those
who incorporate different and complementary styles define
legitimate 21st Century Leadership
DNA.
21st Century Leadership DNA will
enable men and women to exercise power and influence,
incorporating traditional female attitudes and actions
with the driving forces often attributed to their male
counterparts. It is not about one or the other, it is
about both. However, to make the point, let's
focus on ten reasons why women are effective and find
ways to incorporate what we can:
- Think of others, often first, facilitating communication
with listening.
- Use "we" instead of "I" - especially
when describing success.
- Show appreciation for the work of others, easily
and often.
- Demonstrate respect for colleagues, avoiding "ego" shows
and showing off.
- Trust others and share credit, assuming they have
admirable motives.
- Accept differences of opinion and approach, listening
for constructive alternatives.
- Be willing to work outside and inside the home -producing
revenue and a safe-haven.
- Reach out and assist others, graciously, keeping
the team moving forward.
- Seek to find common ground; resolving and not escalating
routine conflict.
- Keeping
their leadership wake smaller, not disrupting the efforts
of others.
My mother said: "You don't have
to yell to be heard; however, you do need to listen."
Question: (E-242)
"Justice and White-Collar Crimes"
What is the right amount of punishment for Ken Lay and
Jeff Skilling who destroyed Enron, lost retirement funds
for thousands of their own employees while they were
stealing and hiding millions on their way to becoming
incredibly wealthy? Some people get life in prison
for committing a crime against one person. These
two violated thousands and did harm to millions. What
is fair?
Response:
"Enron-like" misbehavior has occurred in
only a small percentage of corporations. While
the media have highlighted, appropriately, the scams
of WorldCom, Enron, Health South, and even though the
list appears endless; it is not. Violations of trust
must not be explained away and should not be justified.
Fortunately, convicted white-collar criminals are serving
time. Cheating in high-stakes business is carried
out by those who suggest double-standards and preferential
treatment. Their self-proclaimed superior life-style,
flawed leadership and cunning intellect enabled them
to test and violate economic, legal and yes, integrity
standards. False pride fed arrogance that catapulted
some of these criminals toward jail.
Will prison transform these big-time con-artists from
manipulating marauders to honest individuals capable
of leading others responsibly? Probably not! But,
it seems that visible reminders are required to showcase
and teach appropriate behaviors. One particularly
despicable culprit claimed to have had a religious awakening
during his trial and his jury bought his conversion story.
The timing for his new-found piety appears suspiciously
self-serving. Historically, societies seek scapegoats
who become symbols of the importance of cleansing and
purging of infected communities and organizations. Flagrant
violators take the "hit" and their names
become punch-lines when people gather to talk. The infamous
embody corruption, visible reminders of what needed to
be expunged. Is that punishment enough?
Even an imperfect justice system is responsible for "righting
wrongs" - and that is happening. Laws provide
a framework for crimes to be judged in ways that protect
citizens. Confidence in the integrity of the justice
system implies that human beings will ultimately hand
out appropriate sentences, designed to discourage repeat
offenders and intimidate copycats. And, until
better laws are enacted, this might be the best that
can be done.
Historically, some societies incorporated a little "wiggle
room" - sometimes called a second chance
or forgiveness - for those who violated socially-constructive
principles. If perfection were the only acceptable
behaviors, then who would survive? Leniency is
more than a "nice" concept for judges to
hand down. Graciousness prevents self-righteous
and short-sighted power brokers from breaking the spirit
of entire generations; some of whom may be flawed, but
are still decent and worthy of re-education and another
opportunity.
In the meantime, pre-meditated corporate thievery should
be a ticket to jail. Judicial integrity determines
how long.
Question: (E-243)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on June 14, 2006
"Balance power and integrity"
Where can one find individuals who
effectively balance power with integrity?
Response:
Just about anywhere. In politics they are called
statesmen, (more correctly, today, states-persons) willing
to bridge partisan divides and work on behalf of everyone. In
business they are icons of leadership, courage and social
responsiveness. They seek to do well without leaving
scorched earth and dead bodies behind them. They
are clear about the mission of their work and are always
aware of inevitable conflicts, that when dealt with properly,
will not destroy the diverse fabric that is community,
local or global. Power, wealth and fame seem to
fall more easily upon gracious human beings. Those
who see through the mirrors of narcissism and the parasites
who are the "hangers on' - they wear
their mantle of authority with ease. These mentors
welcome opportunities to assist those who are still striving
mightily to make sense of the process itself.
A senior executive, who recently attended our MBA
Impact: Essentials workshop, on May 23, said
that to his surprise - way too many folks he
encounters are COWS. Cringing
when he pronounced "COWS' - I asked
what he meant? Immediately, he explained that C.O.W.S. stood
for Concerned Only With Self.
You have met these folks. They finish their 20-minute
non-stop lecture on everything about themselves, their
families and their hobbies. Then, they ask you
what you think about them, their families and their
hobbies. Sitting next to these folks on a long
flight is painful. For them, it really is All
About Me - or AAM as
was this same executive's description of those
who parade around in the name of teams, while really
demanding the spotlight and the adulation. They are
neither statesmen nor leaders. They are boors.
Taking COWS in a little different direction: have
you been in an airport lately? People have begun
to move around in jets so casually that some appear to
have decided to travel in their underwear. And,
they appear unconcerned if you are offended by their
outlandish or provocative appearance - including
their private tattoos that are now public. It is
really a parade of COWS! Actually,
they are more like preening peacocks - but, who
can figure out what to say with the seven letters of p.e.a.c.o.c.k? So,
the term of COWS works fine.
To be counted among those who exude power with integrity:
- seek to understand before demanding to be understood
- keep conversations focused on others; not self
- congratulate and encourage verbally; including sending
handwritten notes
- communicate confidence in the future, with enthusiasm
- assist those who will likely never be able to repay
you
Power with integrity is predictably gracious. Are
you?
Question: (E-244)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on June 21, 2006
"By listening, parents helped save
the day"
Please tell us if what we did reflected integrity? Here
is what happened and how we responded.
Our "special" son, now 19 was born with certain
learning and behavioral challenges. We were advised
early in his life to provide clear and nurturing limits
along with medication that had downside risks. Hoping
he might finish grade school, we were thrilled when he
completed high school, able to play on the varsity tennis
team! Wanting to share his success with friends
and neighbors, we planned a graduation party for June
11, sending invitations in early May.
On Monday morning, May 22, at 3:00 a.m., I felt a
tug, and it was our son, saying, "Mom, we need to talk
about the party. Please call it off." I
suggested that we talk at breakfast and he shook his
head saying we needed to talk, now. So, we did.
He was uncomfortable with many of the people who were
coming to the party. They were neighbors, friends
and some of his peers. He wanted the party cancelled. Not
wanting his accomplishment to go by without a celebration,
I asked if he would tell us who he would invite. He
agreed, creating his list. In the meantime, my
husband and I contacted those we had invited, asked for
their understanding, telling them the party was just
for our son's close friends.
All of his invited guests came:
- several of his classmates
- the woman who cleans our home
- the gentleman who sold him his car
- a thoughtful crossing guard from years earlier
- his former school bus driver
- his barber
- an assistant manager of a fast food restaurant
- the high school librarian
- our general contractor and two of his assistants
who built our home - sometimes sharing part
of their lunches with him
- his neurologist's administrative assistant
who was always polite
- his fifth-grade teacher who helped him improve
his reading and classroom behavior
- and the list goes on
At the party that he orchestrated, he was confident
and the perfect host introducing all of the guests. He
blossomed, yet again. Most of his invited guests
brought their families and smiles were seen everywhere. My
husband and I beamed - for and with our son.
However, we did not keep our word to those original
invited guests we cancelled. We violated
the character definition. What do you think?
Response:
Yes, proud parents, you listened,
took a few risks and created an environment that truly
was directed to the person for whom the celebration was
intended, your son. Sounds like you have a special family,
in lots of ways - combining charity, graciousness
and character to achieve integrity.
Question: (E-245)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on July 19, 2006
"Planning, integrity linked at hip"
You talk a great deal about how sound planning reflects
integrity. Do you believe taking things as they
come along and simply reacting lacks integrity?
Response:
Yes, way too often! Abdicating responsibility for
substantive planning and timely preparation often puts
valuable resources at risk, including time, energy, raw
materials, individuals and teams. Inadequate planning
is almost never constructive. Someone said that
99% of the time surprises are not good news - at
least in business.
However, before launching into my too-often overly-zealous
defense of planning, including being on time, allow me
to poke some fun at me. A religious friend said: "If
you want to see God laugh, share your plans." In
truth, predicting the future, accurately, is impossible. A
healthy amount of flexibility is prudent, but it does
not excuse flagrant disregard for risky and dangerous
situations. How about flying to Asia without a
flight plan, adequate fuel, oxygen or water? Whether
unprepared travelers out of money or mountain climbers
without supplies; there are negative consequences for
irresponsible actions. Even squirrels store acorns
for unpredictable and rough times.
Certain personality-types love spontaneity because it
allows them to leverage their creative problem-solving
prowess to provide last-minute miracles, appearing - time
after time - to have saved the day. Even though
proper planning would have discounted many of their latest
dramatic accomplishment, they appear reluctant to drink
the glory. But, they do. Bosses, spouses,
parents, children, friends, board members, politicians,
social workers, and others on life's path know
that "a firefighting society breeds arsonists." Thriving
on recognition and rewards, these self-proclaimed superheroes
do whatever it takes to secure recognition with their
grand entrances, having sanctioned the very "fire" they
can't wait to smother.
Children learn early that if they do not properly prepare
(homework, managing money, etc.) then one or both parents
will bail them out. Co-dependent behaviors thrive
from the mutual benefits of poor planning: the
need to be needed, allowing others to shrug responsibilities
so that someone can maintain manipulative "last-minute" control.
Thankfully, integrity-centered leadership offers a constructive
alternative:
- differentiate work from play; choosing
to plan for work, while enjoying play
- communicate planning limitations
and solicit expertise when necessary
- implement according to mutually-accepted
standards, in a timely way
- resist the "firefighting" mentality
by insisting on pro-active collaboration
- challenge "arsonists" who
encourage emergencies, suggesting that their methods
are more often self-serving than organizationally-productive
- recognize spontaneity as a legitimate
source for happiness and celebration that brings value
through creativity and integrity-centered relationships
- remember, however, that being open
to opportunities is not the same as ignoring leadership-planning
responsibilities at home, work and community
Leadership integrity comes with a plan that remains
open to change.
Question: (E-246)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on June 28, 2006
"Government practices don't violate
integrity"
The government is tapping phone lines and monitoring
internet activities; while roadside cameras spy as we
drive. Are such practices violating integrity?
Response:
No! Current architects of rigorous intrusions into
our lives are often the same individuals charged with
increasing safety and security. The trend toward
the "snooping" police state can be traced
to selfishness: internet-bullies and cyber-clods,
along with television hosts who exploit guests and viewers
while exercising wholesale disregard for others' rights.
Internet pedophiles seduce, rape, and murder children.
Terrorists use cellular phones to detonate bombs; indiscriminately
killing combatants and civilians. Egotistical drivers
turn scenic highways into killing fields with road rage.
Reality-based television programs boil over into filthy
language and fighting; ostensibly meeting a market demand
for cesspool behavior.
It should be common knowledge that unless we operate
with integrity, including self-regulation, society will
demand increasing government oversight. When
individuals choose to ignore constructive boundaries,
then power-wielding authorities will carry-out intrusive
monitoring to the cheers of many.
Disregard for others encourages the creeping hand of
the intrusive police state; strangling freedoms previously
taken for granted. Unfortunately, non-thinking individuals
regularly trade freedom for security, at least, short
term. Television program hosts Jerry Springer and
Maury Povich have replaced conversation with screaming - lavishly
rewarding a public behavioral model that now witnesses
ten-year-olds using semi-automatic weapons to solve playground
arguments.
Violence begins with an idea and ends with death and
it must be stopped. Invasion of privacy, in the
name of security, is a trend that will be difficult to
change until society embraces self-regulating integrity-centered
behaviors like character, openness, honesty, graciousness
and civility.
Respect for others will displace a culture of "me
first" when more individuals:
- Stop cheating at work and home:
- office computers are for work, not games; the telephone
is for connecting with customers and prospects, not "chatting" with
friends
- home is where "true partners" support
one another, through thick and thin; honoring commitments
of mutual-support and fidelity
- Police personal and business environments;
monitoring and controlling guests who visit there.
If you lock your doors before you leave home, then
why not do the same with the televisions and computers
that open your home to potentially hideous intruders?
- Refuse to lose the battle against
cyber-punks who are perverting the global information
highway's dream to provide universal internet
access.
- Demand that public servants, elected
and appointed, provide practical and immediate counsel
and support to combat destructive activities - on
streets, in neighborhoods, through television
and the internet; and, yes, inside their own
agencies.
- Support constructive values by being
both responsible and pro-active; challenging destructive
behaviors when and where they occur - promptly, clearly
and graciously.
Question: (E-247)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on July 5, 2006
"Generosity deserves thanks, not criticism"
A letter to the editor in the New York Times, 6-29-06,
criticizes Warren Buffett for entrusting his billions
to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, suggesting
his monies would be better spent in the United States;
not in Africa. What is your reaction to the suggestion?
Response:
Goofy! Warren Buffett has demonstrated in his selfless
actions that charity and graciousness fit together in
the life and legacy of a successful business leader. It
was and is his money and he can do with that money what
he chooses. Were he financing filthy movies, drug
distribution networks, decadent lifestyles for subsequent
generations of the idle rich - then criticism would
be warranted. But, to turn over a life-time of
wealth accumulation for the intention of raising the
quality of life globally - beginning on the African
continent is nothing short of world-class citizenry. Wags
who criticize the generosity of others need to make their
own dollars and distribute them as they choose, but responsibly,
in culturally-constructive ways.
A few years ago, my wife and I made a number of modifications
to our home. We liked the results and invited friends
to stop by and see the changes. The very first
guests mentioned that they thought we "should have" .
. . and that was when we interrupted, saying: "Please
do not say anything about any part of our remodel, except
- - oooh! and ahhhh!" We reminded visitors
that we were not interested in additional making additional
improvement, certainly not just now. Had we wanted
to do things differently, we would have set aside additional
dollars to hire to finance more costly work-order changes."
Integrity recommendation: with your money, do
as you choose, responsibly. If you do not like
our remodel decisions, and how we choose to spend our
money, then spend your money differently. We will
not slam your dream house and expect the same gracious
response in return. Our "house tours" are
short and generally quiet - except for the mandatory "ooohs" and "ahhhhs."
The Buffett billions; being combined with the Gates
billions; clearly and dramatically place impact above
ego; modeling serious commitments to public service. These
giants are teaching many people an effective way to leverage,
in positive ways, wealth, power, status and influence. Doing
good, after having done well, is an important part of
the Buffett-Gates legacy that now becomes a constructive
benchmark for what can be done with talent that creates
riches.
Appreciatively and respectfully, it is time to offer a
genuine thank you to those who give, not because they need
their names in lights, but rather because they choose to
provide light and hope for others, longer after they have
lived.
Question: (E-248)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on July 12, 2006
"Options dating opens the door to abuse"
U.S. investigators are examining more than 50 companies'
option granting practices, including back-dating and
spring-loading options. Even though this is not illegal,
yet, it seems to lack integrity.
Response:
Cheating investors confirms, again, a breakdown in the
social contract that needs to exist between and among
all stakeholders: customers, owners, investors,
employees and government agencies. Manipulating options
seems to be widespread. If it is not yet at the
Enron and WorldCom level - soon we will learn how
pervasive this option-cancer has spread? Backdating
involves changing the grant date of a stock option from
the day it was actually granted to an earlier date when
the stock was trading at a lower price. Not fraudulent
on its own, backdating may be considered fraud if the
company granting the options does not properly disclose
that it backdated the options.
Spring-loading is different from back-dating in that
it is not retroactive. Rather, a company will set an
option grant date and exercise price on a day shortly
before the company intends to release news expected
to boost the stock price. The
stock options are immediately worth more because the exercise price is lower
than the current share price. Spring-loading can involve insider trading violations,
or trading on non-public material information to realize an unfair gain. Backdating
can also lead to accounting fraud if a company does not properly record the difference
as a compensation expense. Experts describe backdating as essentially giving
the option holder free money because the options are immediately worth more.
Investors' faith in corporate accounting again is under
siege. Over the last few months, 50 companies, and
counting - most of them technology firms - have
disclosed that they were under investigation by federal authorities for possibly
manipulating executives' stock option grants to boost the potential payoffs. Even
so, stocks of many tech firms have taken steep hits in recent months as the probes
have been reported. With memories of 2002 still fresh, some investors appear
to be selling first and asking questions later.
When businesses fail in their values, they decay from
the inside. In the late 1990's, values came to be viewed
as expensive and conservative relics of the old economy. Many of today's option-probes involve those granted
before the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley corporate reform law. Prior to that, companies
had 40 days after the grant date to file a Form 4 with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission reporting a stock option grant, giving a company a 40-day
window to pick a grant date. Sarbanes-Oxley cut that reporting deadline to 48
hours.
Fattening the "pay packages" of a special few
erodes public trust and investor confidence. Corporate
leaders, "wake up" and exercise appropriate
compensation integrity.
Question: (E-249)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on August 2, 2006
"Housekeeper needs to do right thing"
Our housekeeper, whom we employ through an agency, phoned
earlier today, requesting for her workday to be postponed. She
said that tomorrow she will call in "sick" to
the agency and then come and work for us. She can
help us to sidestep the agency's overhead fees,
pocketing more for herself and even reducing what we
need to pay for her time. What do you think? I
have already said it was O.K.
Response:
How sad and how short-sighted! Dishonesty comes
in many forms. Stealing and being an accessory
to thievery are not integrity-centered activities. Many
relationships have been tainted by this event - as
you have described it, and more will be. Obviously,
you did not consider the ramifications of saying yes.
- This worker is willing to cheat her current employer. What
are the chances she will cheat you?
- Your decision to "go along" with this
fraud communicates that you are willing to violate
a contract between you and a supplier. What
does this tell the employee about your loyalty and
integrity?
- Your friends and neighbors, as well as members of
your family, will learn, sooner or later, that you
took advantage of a supplier. In this instance
it is an agency that earns its fees by providing background
information on employees and insurance as well as replacements
when a worker cannot or does not show up at the appointed
time.
- You have made a mistake. When this situation
arose, there was an integrity-centered response, and
you might have said: "We work with
your agency. If you leave the agency, then we
can discuss how we might work together, directly. However,
we honor relationships, personal and professional,
and you have now communicated that you do not. You
must address this with the agency or you risk our continuing
to work with you."
- What choice do you have now? Should you report
the employee to the agency? Certainly you have
now complicated your life with your decision to participate
in the dishonest manipulation, having her work for
you while cutting out the agency. Who can possibly
come out of this without smelling badly?
- When you chose to "go along to get along" - you
started a snowball down a steep hill. Ignoring
courtesy, professionalism, integrity and simple rules
of good business, you, the agency and an employee have
now begun a slide down a value-violated ravine.
Cut your losses and stay with the agency; if they will
still work with you. Nothing much good emerges from
relationships built on lying, cheating and stealing - whether
for a little or a lot. Integrity matters.
Question: (E-250)
"Zonking youth at Summer Camp"
Summer camps for youth, today, dispense values, skills
and legal drugs prescribed by summer camp physicians
who may not have conducted rigorous evaluations. This
was reported by Jane Gross in Sunday's New York
Times, 7-16-06, on the front page. Is this a good
thing?
Response:
The ramifications of drugs in the human body can be scary,
this according to a physician friend. He is frustrated
by those who want instant solutions to complex physical
and emotional problems - especially with young
people. According to the New York Times article you referenced,
Jane Gross states: "Some [summer camp] doctors,
nurses and directors are uneasy about giving children
so-called off-label drugs like lexapro and luvox. Such
medications are used for depression and anxiety and have
been tested only on adults, but can be legally prescribed
to children." Parents know that adolescents
are changing dramatically - physically, chemically and
emotionally. Adding chemicals, not researched on
youth, can be dangerous.
Here is what I have observed. Several years ago,
my mother requested that we help her to relocate from
the Midwest. She was in her early eighties. She
had dealt with cancer and heart disease and knew that
some of her frailties were complicated by decades of
cigarette smoking. However, she remained alert,
but had lost much of her energy; still wanting to maximize
whatever time she had left. In 1995, at the time
she moved west, her various physicians were directing
her to take 38 pills per day - each addressing
her multiple medical issues or countering chemical complications
created by previously prescribed medications.
Shortly after arriving at her new home, she was assessed
by a competent senior-citizen specialist, a gerontologist.
Mom's new doctor reduced her pill usage from 38
to 4. Her mobility was still limited, but her former
energy-levels re-surfaced. Her agile mind returned to
solving cross-word puzzles. Enjoying irony and
sharing her sense of humor enabled our family to engage
again with the person and personality of our octogenarian
mother. My conclusion: too much prescription-drug usage
is harmful.
Regarding summer camps, young people and what parents
might consider:
- Re-think the current trendy dependence upon prescription
drugs.
- Research alternative methods for building confidence
in youth, including parent and counselor tutoring,
coaching, quiet walks and sports activities, including
tennis or simply pitch-and-catch.
- Invest in summer camps that focus on relationships
that nurture, teach and bring constructive discipline
to bear, when and where appropriate. Love with
limits, along with learning, can be guided with relationships
instead of chemicals.
- Know about the risks and side effects of every pill
being dispensed.
- Protect those who cannot protect themselves, especially
children.
Parental integrity matters.
Question: (E-251)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on August 23, 2006
"If you can't beat 'em, sue 'em"
Lawsuits abound throughout the United States. What
does this say about our society?
Response:
Relationships, or the lack of, are at the core of a lawsuit-crazed
society. And lawyers did not create a litigious climate
alone. Individuals hire attorneys to do
their dirty work. And, why is this happening? Family,
community, civility and social awareness are taking a
beating. There was a time when society accepted
responsibility for taking care of those who were unable
to care for themselves. No more! When individuals,
families, communities and nations become increasingly
isolated from one another, culturally and economically,
then rudeness and intolerance can prevail. Insensitivity
leads to chaos in forms of road-rage, domestic violence
and even global conflict. Without relationships
then mutual respect disappears.
"Git 'er done" is
a mantra of the blue-collar comedy tour. Out of
time, pressured and frantic adults demand instant-everything,
risking important relationships!
- How frequently do today's families eat meals
together; discussing common concerns that can strengthen
the fragile family structure?
- Soccer "moms" and coaching "dads" drive
to endless events, often hurried. What are children
learning from adults who preach follow the rules while
violating speed laws with fuzz-busters and laser "neutralizers"?
- Commercials now say that overweight people are not
responsible for their condition! What or who
are the external factors forcing individuals to eat
fattening foods late at night?
- The "on-demand" television culture enables
the viewing of programs at individual convenience. No
time-management planning required! Today's
world revolves around "individuals"!
- Technology and medical science have teamed up to
provide instant-gratification. Products that
only a few years ago would never have been discussed
in polite company are now broadcast 24 hours a day. Chemical
solutions for sexual dysfunctions are advertised by
former candidates for President of the United States. Intimacy
is now on the "clock" - having become
for many a physical-biological transaction instead
of a life-affirming relationship.
- Phrases like "get to the bottom line" and "let's
net this out, now" were common primarily in business
transactions, but now have entered the realm of the
personal. "Go girl" is short-hand
for congratulations, best wishes and we are rooting
for you. "High-fives" replace phrases
like thank you for doing well for our team or we are
really proud of you. It is efficient way to communicate,
and you must accept it or you are not current.
- Until crude and vicious language and actions are
replaced by thoughtful communications and gracious
behaviors, then isolation and frustration will generate
even more litigation, tension and conflict.
Integrity-centered relationships involving graciousness
will increase insights and understanding, while reducing
the tremendous costs that are created by needless conflict
between individuals, families and societies.
Question: (E-252)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on August 9, 2006
"Salad product recall was a proactive
move"
Did you read about the voluntary recall of 30,000 packages
of baby spinach and spring mix products that will cost
a local company more than $500,000? Was that an
integrity decision by the folks of Classic Salads?
Response:
Yes, the decision by leaders of a local agricultural
business to "bite the bullet" and lose a
half-million dollars was an expensive integrity decision. It
is similar to actions taken by Johnson and Johnson, the
makers of Tylenol, removing their product from store
shelves because it might be tainted. Integrity
is not the easy road. A few weeks ago, PepsiCo
refused to participate in an offer to purchase, trade-secrets
from their competitor, Coca-Cola. Decent people are making
integrity-centered decisions of this kind, to do the
right thing, millions of times, every day, all over the
world. Some minority of operators will continue
cutting corners, cheating customers and lying to suppliers.
But, individuals with integrity and the longer-view of
leadership will prevail, from the boardroom to loading
dock.
In 1984, Phil Crosby wrote a book about quality explaining
that positive and purposeful attitudes, from leaders
to front-liners, along with systems that applied to everyone,
can resolve quality problems. Perfection is not easy
to achieve, but it must be the objective. And,
when the decision-makers at Classic Salads learned that
tests revealed some of their products might be contaminated
by salmonella - they dumped their products. As
Jim Bogart, President and General Counsel, Grower-Shipper
Association of Central California, said: "Processes
are in place to protect the buying public. These procedures
are used 24 hours per day and seven days a week. Holding
our industry to an ever-improving set of standards, perfection,
zero-defects, is the only goal." Jim underscored
that the system worked, in this instance, underscoring
that just one outbreak is one too many.
Lex Camany of Classic Salads was quoted: "Money
wasn't the matter here. Food safety was the
paramount issue." He went on to say that
the decision to act might have waited a few more days
until the tests were confirmed, but he and his colleagues
decided not to take any chances.
From the Bracher Center website: "Integrity
is one of several paths; it distinguishes itself
from the others because it is the right path and
the only one upon which you will never get lost." --
M.H. McKee. Integrity is congruence
between what you say and what you do, as well as
what you say about what you did. Integrity is the
strength, unity, clarity and purpose that upholds
and sustains all of the activities of the enterprise.
Integrity provides this stabilizing dimension by
never, ever, compromising.
Agribusiness and integrity - in partnership - strengthen
lives and communities!
Question: (E-253)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on August 16, 2006
"Postal employee fails customer service
test"
Spent three frustrating hours at the local Post Office,
dealing with a non-responsive employee! She has seen
me - a regular customer - for many years and
I have always been respectful. What happened to
customer service? Do you know the right way to address
such behavior?
Response:
Regarding quality service, it is too often an exception
today and accounts for the public's eagerness to
identify legendary service, almost anywhere, and reward
it. Olympic gold medal winner, Bob Richards, said
many years ago that it is easy to be great. He
clarified that it takes so little to stand out in a world
of pretenders and wannabes. His minimum standards
were: walk a mile in less that 20 minutes, read
three books a year and regularly support charities with
time and money. Simple as this sounds, according to Richards,
only a very small percentage of people ever accomplish
all three. So, there you have it, laggards are
everywhere in our society, and they have been with us
for quite a while - including some who work at
the post office.
Your recent frustrations with service from an employee
at a United States Post Office confirm Richards' observations. From
what you described, post office and service appear; in
what one can only hope is an isolated situation, to be
contradictory terms, an oxymoron, more like a deafening
silence. When employees give the appearance of
not caring about customers, behaving as if they have
100% job protection from those they serve - then
customer relations suffer. When customer needs
come across as unimportant and employees leave the service
counter to "take their scheduled breaks" - even
when the lines are long, public relations will take a
beating. Private enterprises that treat customers
this way will be driven out of business by customer-savvy
competitors.
Suggestions for addressing unacceptable customer service:
- Start with the local post office
manager, seeking a constructive solution; and, if not
satisfied, then. . .
- Forward your complaint to your Congressional
Representative, asking for assistance.
- Expect responsible leaders to have
pride in their work, wanting the very best for all
customers; including government agencies.
- Acknowledge your lack of understanding
of the performance pressures and budget constraints
of the post office.
- Remind postal employees that they
never need to "demonstrate their power over any
customer" because they already have it. They
control who gets mail - and that is power. The
post office system delivers tremendous amounts of information,
accurately, throughout the year. We need professional
and energized postal employees and they need satisfied
customers.
Remember, integrity, with respect and
professionalism, is how business needs to be conducted - all
the time.
Question: (E-254)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on October 18, 2006
"No excuses: Return phone calls"
How can responsible adults not return phone calls in
a timely way? Arrogant and rude, such insensitive
people irk me. Any suggestions?
Response:
No, because they upset me too! "Closing the
loop" via phone, where possible, is courteous and
professional, whether with family, friends, customers,
suppliers, competitors or investors. It makes good
sense, personally and professionally, to handle issues - positive
or negative - thoughtfully, efficiently and graciously. Dial
the number!
Excuses of those who procrastinate:
- Too busy
- Unable to reach consensus with colleagues and refuse
to complicate follow-up communication with partial
or incomplete responses
- Afraid of hurting feelings by delivering bad news
- Intimidated by potential for confrontation
- Problem just might go away if ignored a little longer
- Want to demonstrate to others that personal timetable
will not be altered by the intrusive impatience of
another
- Not very concerned by what upsets others unless it
causes personal problems
- Believe no news is good news and others ought to
feel the same
These explanations are seldom adequate for those who
have not heard back. Silence or feelings of being
ignored can generate powerful and negative emotional
reactions, few of which are constructive or productive. When
the "loop" is not closed appropriately,
in a timely way, and deafening silence fills the empty
space; Fear, Uncertainty
and Doubt will Guarantee Exasperation. We
call this the FUDGE factor. There
can be legitimate reasons for delays in follow-up. But
periodic updates, reassurances, even apologies for taking
so long to resolve an issue can reduce stress. Connecting
via phone often reduces the risks for demoralizing and
destructive misunderstandings; helping to avoid costly
conflict.
Dr. Donald C. Kleckner, a retired Navy officer, reminded
me of wisdom he learned from his superiors. To prevent
him from getting sideways with his colleagues, he was
told to communicate, constantly or risk falling victim
to: "When in trouble, when in doubt, run
in circles, scream and shout." Having never
captained a large Navy ship, but only a sailboat that
was less than forty feet in length, the ocean (and life)
can create intimidating circumstances making it is easy
to feel anxious; wanting to share fears, loudly. But,
smart-money says that clarity in communication, along
with calm, are most effective.
Emails and voice messages resolve many communications issues. But,
except for face-to-face meetings, there is no better technique
for demonstrating responsiveness and genuine concern for
others than with the telephone. Connecting can be
cumbersome, playing time-consuming phone tag. However,
such persistence at "closing the loop" builds
confidence, confirms relationship-integrity, re-establishes
trust and increases productivity (and probably profits
as well). Returning phone calls promptly is integrity
in action.
Question: (E-255)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on September 6, 2006
"Impatience, greed come at a price"
Cutting into lines has become routine at the grocery,
post office and at the movie theater. What should
be private cell-phone conversations are broadcast in
hotel lobbies, airports and on public transportation. What
has happened to social sensitivity and interpersonal
integrity?
Response:
Some people, young and old, choose to behave like spoiled
brats. They come across as impatient and greedy,
way too often. They use lame excuses, or none at
all, to barge ahead, being loud and obtrusive, irritating
lots of others - on freeways, at eating establishments
and in crowded places, including elevators. In
this column, we have addressed selfishness, rudeness
and that fact that one's ego is not really
one's amigo. Whatever it is that
drives counter-productive behaviors, the results are
seldom positive. Tension and conflict are lurking;
and not always just below the surface of frenetic individuals
with frayed emotions.
Twenty years ago, a client asked me and our consulting
company to summarize the mental and operational tendencies
of managers most likely to succeed, longer-term. Executives - from
both small and large companies - began to contract
with our Monterey-based executive counseling firm, Dimension
Five Consultants, to maximize their odds for hiring individuals
most likely to thrive in an expanding management role. Our
conclusions spawned the title for a book, which remains
in our files, highlighting the derailing factors for
those who would like to be effective leaders, but probably
won't. The title we chose was: A
lot! Now! & Cash! The key
to understanding the title rests with knowing the right
three questions to ask:
What do you want? A lot!
When do you want it? Now!
In what form would you like it? Cash!
Upwardly mobile managers possess a sense of proportion. They
choose to earn rewards versus demanding them. Effective
managers understand priorities; incorporating team achievement
above individual accomplishment. And, they do not
focus rigidly on pay; but meld economic needs with career
fulfillment. Winners will not run roughshod over
others; destroying morale and risking longer-terms organizational
viability.
A forty-year shiner-of-shoes at the San Jose-Mineta
Airport recently summarized the causes for the business
scandals of the last several years. He had already
provided keen observations about corporate leadership
misbehaviors, both legal and moral, and the destructive
economic trends they were fueling in earlier conversations
with me. You may read about his insights in our
2004 book, Integrity Matters on
pages 102 and 103. "Root causes of the corporate
collapses and losses of pensions for hundreds and thousands
of victims," Tom suggested, "were and are
impatience and greed."
Integrity and leadership-effectiveness, including constructive
citizenship, are not simply about immediate gratification
and recognition; but also must include personal and professional
fulfillment, longer-term.
Question: (E-256)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on August 30, 2006
"We need to make call to the Web police"
My personal and business emails are regularly clogged
with unsolicited filth, spam and intrusive advertising.
Viruses are a constant threat to slowing down; sometimes
shutting down my internet access. Sick-minds are
poisoning this wonderful technology. Who can help
restore business and moral integrity to the worldwide
web?
Response:
At this time, there is no global authority with the power
and influence to control either the uses or abuses of
the internet; therefore, only you can. It is an individual
responsibility. The worldwide web stretches out before
humanity as the next great frontier. Unfortunately,
along side everyone already plugged-in to and committed
to the internet's fantastic promise; there reside
criminals, con-artists and ego-driven hackers who find
pleasure and profit in messing-up this marvelous mechanism. Parasites
and perverts have become difficult to differentiate from
legitimate businesses. Pop ups, instead of encouraging
purchases, have become computer-virus red flags.
Unless or until the internet users decide to self-police,
unsavory characters (and businesses) will ride rough-shod
over the unsuspecting. It should be common
knowledge that free markets - and the internet
and its users - must operate with integrity, a culture
of compliance, or face increasing government oversight.
The good news is that anyone can access global information
instantaneously; and that is also the bad news. Anyone
with something to sell -whether legitimate, valuable,
irrelevant, stolen, uplifting, filthy or frivolous - can
reach out world-wide, with one keystroke. To combat
the ambiguity of internet-driven communications, hundreds
of "firewall" computer-security firms were
created. As devious individuals refine their art-forms
for gaining the mind-share of those who are "linked-in" on
the web, so too do the security design-engineers battling
perverse and time-wasting viruses and spam with ever-stronger
firewalls.
Firewalls have helped protect computers in large companies
for years. Now, they're a critical component of home
networks, as well. In computing,
a firewall is a piece of hardware and/or software which
functions in a networked
environment to prevent some communications forbidden
by the security policy, analogous to
the function of firewalls in
building construction. A firewall has the basic
task of controlling traffic between different zones of
trust. Typical zones of trust include the Internet (a
zone with no trust) and an internal
network (a zone with high trust). The ultimate goal
is to provide controlled connectivity between zones of
differing trust levels through the enforcement of a security
policy and connectivity model based on the least
privilege principle.
In the meantime, protect your computer - along with
your personal and professional life - with approptriate
filters. Integrity, really the lack of, will cripple
the worldwide web, perverting positive promise into nightmarish
confusion.
Question: (E-257)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on September 13, 2006
"Marketers must take responsibility
for their ads"
Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) airs a commercial
portraying a monster in a youngster's bedroom. The
actor-father tells the child not to be afraid because
PG&E lights will stay on. Hummer-vehicle advertises
on television that drivers of their automobile can bully
their way, anyplace and any time. Aren't
such values despicable, even harmful for children and
our culture?
Response:
Yes, using visual scare tactics, creating anxiety for
children, is not as cute as it is cruel. PG&E
has chosen to sell its brand inappropriately. During
one of our public management workshops, titled MBA
Impact: Essentials, I asked a participant - an
educator - at what age a child grasps sarcasm and
innuendo. Her response: "When they
are juniors or seniors in high school." So,
why would a marketing-savvy organization, like PG & E,
risk upsetting thoughtful and caring parents, during
prime time viewing, when there are other clever ways
to communicate their message? Making children the "butt" of
jokes is not appropriate and needs to be pulled from
the airwaves, immediately.
The Hummer commercial is also troublesome. Selling
an oversized highway-approved motorized steel vehicle
as a weapon for retaliation is simply inappropriate. Those
who are politically-correct already challenge the socially-unresponsive
aspects of gas-guzzling vehicles. Why would successful
marketers complicate social insensitivity by promoting
rude behavior? Today, with violence and insensitivity
on the rise among adults and children, encouraging any
behavior other than kindness is not wise. Hummer
advertisers need a more "civil" way to capture
the attention of potential buyers.
Businesses and organizations with quality products and
services (and legitimate brands) do not need to appeal
to cruel and insensitive motives to be successful. PG&E
and Hummer are not breaking laws, neither federal nor
state; but, they are failing to leverage their best assets. They
are not building on the constructive values created by
the Bracher Center's Eight Attributes of
an Integrity-Centered Company: Character, Honesty, Openness,
Authority, Partnership, Performance, Charity and Graciousness.
- Organizations with integrity do not intentionally "poke
fun" at children, of any age, who are our future
hope.
- Using the PG&E monster commercial, should child
care professionals (teachers or baby sitters) employ
horror-language to intimidate youngsters in their care
to do what they are told or fear encountering the gremlin
from the closet?
- Social order is precious and fragile. What are the
positive consequences for our daily lives when Hummer
drivers are encouraged to use their vehicles as equalizers
in battles for road supremacy and personal domination?
- Hummer advertising needs to find a different "hook" to
attract buyers.
The integrity-response includes doing business
with organizations whose espoused-values and observed-actions
confirm respect for the world and its people - all the
time.
Question: (E-258)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on September 20, 2006
"There is no excuse for rudeness"
While attending a silent auction, I was the top bidder
on a piece of art, writing my name as the final count
down was closing. A charity official was present,
approving and certifying my offer. The person who
lost was very upset and began to make a scene accusing
me of cheating him. The rest of the night he followed
my wife and me telling seemingly everyone how I had robbed
and cheated him. We chose to ignore his antics
and move on. Three day's later he called my wife at her
business looking for me. I phone him and was called thief,
rat, etc. He is a lawyer and his wife a member
of the charity's board of directors. I assume
he used his influence to obtain our personal information
to continue harassing us. Two integrity questions: Do
charities have any obligation to protect a donor's
personal information? Have we become a nation of
arrogant poor sports?
Response:
Yes, protecting donor privacy rights ought to be standard
operating procedure. My advisor, a non-profit CEO,
was very clear about organizational accountability, possibility
liability, when she heard of your unpleasant encounter.
She stated: "Other than reporting laws requiring
record-keeping, information about donors is kept private
unless specific consent has been given."
Discretion and professionalism are hallmarks of organizations
that value donors. To underscore your desire to avoid
any future unpleasant situations, let the charities of
your choice know your expectations, up front, in writing.
Arrogant poor sports are not unique to charitable events. Bullies
can be male or female, young or old. Unfortunately,
our frequently overly-tolerant society rewards those
who intimidate with disproportionately-high amounts of
pleasure, wealth, fame and power. Your circumstances
were complicated, so it appears, by the immature response
of an angry male who brought testosterone to the scene,
making a simple disappointment into a challenge to his
macho identity. His abusive tactics demonstrated
no integrity.
Ugly behaviors, like what you described, occur way too
often. Good-hearted individuals want to give and
enjoy seeing and feeling the impact of their generosity. Making
sure all participants know how to behave supportively
and graciously in public events is a positive step. Erosion
of civil behavior, even when folks are decked-out in
their finery, will soil the most elegant of events; besmirching
the image of the charity being supported. Children
are (or at least used to be) disciplined when they did
not play well with others. Sounds like your "fellow-
bidder" left his manners at home and needs a "good
talking to" - soon.
Leaders of integrity-centered organizations, including
charities, establish and enforce clear donation and bidding
rules; motivating and retaining valuable supporters.
Question: (E-259)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on September 27, 2006
"Terminated workers deserve better
than e-mail notice"
RadioShack laid off 400 employees by email in Ft. Worth,
Texas, in August, 2006. Is that leadership with
integrity?
Response:
Treating human beings like inventory, to be hired used
and, when no longer needed, insensitively dismissed,
is unprofessional and demonstrates a lack of leadership
integrity.
How can electronic employee job terminations be justified? If
there were an award for being totally insensitive, RadioShack's
recent human resources actions would put them near the
top. Making decisions about profit objectives and personnel
needs is the responsibility of those in charge. How
those actions are carried out communicates the quality
and integrity of leadership. Such callousness about
people is an image that will stick with RadioShack for
a long time; probably discouraging all but the most desperate
from ever applying to work there.
What is even more fascinating than the hideous decision
to terminate 400 jobs electronically was the pathetic
implementation process provided by those in Human Resources. After
calling the employees to an all-hands meeting; alerting
attendees that lay-offs would be announced online, those
in Human Resources suggested that any questions be communicated
on RadioShack's intranet site. Just a few
days later, those in HR sent this email message: "The
workforce reduction notification is currently in progress. Unfortunately
your position is one that has been eliminated."
For those who behave like time is more important than
people, such methods appear appropriate. RadioShack
senior management has disconnected trust with communication.
Three minutes per person might not be sufficient for
an exit announcement, but basic decency should suggest
that the human touch is essential. The report about
the tenure of some who were laid off suggests many were
longtime employees.
Lessons to be learned:
- downturns in income often reflect poor leadership,
including failed strategies and inadequate contingency
planning - yes, emergencies and catastrophes
do occur, but, even then, proper prior planning prevents
pathetically poor performance.
- wise leaders find ways of spreading the pain throughout
the organization, top to bottom, retaining valued employees,
even if that means reducing working hours, salaries
and benefits.
- valued employees will appreciate these constructive,
supportive and alternative efforts by management to
protect everyone. They will have been informed
about all of the issues that caused the crisis. Such
candidness and fairness can increase loyalty and commitment
to the organization and its mission.
- challenges are opportunities to galvanize individuals
and teams - when integrity-centered organizational
attributes are perceived in how leaders operate with
character, honesty, openness, authority, partnership,
performance, charity and graciousness.
- Leadership with integrity relies on
continuous, open, forthright, personalized communication.
Hiding behind HR-created tactics, including impersonal
emails, does not qualify.
Doing what is right (integrity) can
lead to doing well.
Question: (E-260)
published in Jim Bracher's Integrity
Matters newspaper column on October 5, 2006
"Traffic citations part of police work"
Salinas police officers make thousands of traffic stops,
ticketing many decent people. Shouldn't cops spend
more time on serious problems like robbery, domestic
violence and murder?
Response:
Police officers issue citations to many "decent
folks" who violate traffic laws.
Tickets save lives. When mostly well-behaving citizens
break traffic laws, thousands of times per year, they
prevent peace officers from other criminal pursuits.
The Police Department exists to serve the community by
protecting life and property, preventing crime, enforcing
the law and maintaining order for all citizens.
Here are some facts about the impacts of poor driving
you may not know:
- Auto accident deaths decline in direct proportion
to the number of tickets written for moving violations.
- Causing injury or death while driving under the influence
is the most commonly committed violent crime in our
society.
- Nationwide, 13,000 deaths are caused each year directly
related to alcohol and automobile crashes. Thirty-six
people die each day, and tens of thousands of lives
are scarred for life.
- Locally, $1 million dollars of the Salinas Police
Department's $33 million budget is devoted to
dealing with traffic violators.
The department could save three-quarters of this money
if drivers exhibited more common courtesy and self-discipline.
That $750,000 saved could deploy seven additional officers
into critical-need areas, immediately.
Here are some ways you can help peace officers better
utilize their time:
- Abide by speed limits - all the time.
- Park in appropriate and legal areas - not handicapped
zones.
- Stop at stop signs; not simply pausing and rolling
on.
- Slow down instead of speeding through yellow lights.
- Allow others to move ahead when merging, giving way
graciously.
- Keep alcohol separated from driving.
- Use a designated driver or call a taxi when driving
skills might be impaired.
- Cease with lame excuses when pulled over, such as "I
only intended to be in there for a minute," "There
was no one coming, so it seemed a silly waste of time
to sit there," "I didn't hurt anyone," "I
was running late," and ... Blah, blah, blah.
Make driving a focused activity.
How can a driver concentrate on traffic when talking on
the phone - socially or closing a deal, listening
to the radio, responding to an e-mail or instant messaging,
drinking a soda, trimming fingernails, arguing with a passenger,
applying mascara and smoking? And, people do all of this
when they should be observing oncoming and merging traffic,
pedestrians and animals!
Obeying traffic laws is an individual act of police-partnership integrity.
Drivers who exercise self-discipline and graciousness free up the time of peace
officers to fulfill their mission: "Working in partnership with the people
of Salinas to enhance the quality of life through the delivery of professional,
superior and compassionate police services to the community."
<<
Back
