Networking can sound intimidating. Yet you do it every day without thinking about it. Every time you ask someone to recommend a plumber, you’re networking. Every time you send your friend to another friend for advice about something, you’re networking. Every time you meet someone at a party and end up calling that person later, you’re networking.
In this phase, networking is solely for the purposes of gathering more information about the various options. Using your statement of intent, you let your “natural network” know that you want to learn more about your areas of interest and ask for their help. Your “natural network” is family, friends, neighbors, trusted colleagues and former colleagues – people with whom you feel comfortable. Ask them if they know anyone who works in your area(s) of interest to whom they’d introduce you. All you want is 20 minutes of that person’s time to learn more about what s/he does and the field in which s/he works.
It’s best if you have some idea of what you think you could do in the area of interest, so people have enough detail to grab onto. If your intention is too broad (“I want to learn more about TV”), it’s hard for people to think of people you could interview. A better statement of intent is “I want to learn more about TV production, especially what goes into making a reality show or a talk show.” This gives your contact enough information to think of people who work in TV production, on reality shows, talk shows, and even cooking, travel or home design shows.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Finding Your "Right Fit" Work
Fantasy is useful to guide us toward our “right fit.” Don’t worry so much about whether something is achievable or not. Notice what you are interested in, drawn to. What magazines do you subscribe to? When you open a newspaper, what articles do you read almost or all the way through? If you decide to take a class, what are you drawn to? Even if you decide not to take it and instead take something “practical,” what sparked your interest? And actually, pay close attention to classes you “wish” you could take but it really isn’t practical or realistic or useful or something you should spend any time on. That may be the biggest clue to what your potential passion is, to your future “right fit.” In the noticing, you can start to identify things that are meaningful to you and in which you want to invest time and energy.
In the exploring process, it’s helpful to put aside judgment. This is merely the exploration phase, the time when you get to know a little more about the topic or issue or field that sparked your interest. There’s no lifetime commitment called for, simply information gathering. When you start to explore a new field, by definition you know very little about it. In gathering more information, you will start to be affected by the new information – it may resonate with you and spur you on to learn more, or you will shy away from further exploration. A gut reaction is a fantastic guide during your “information gathering.” Scientists have found that we actually have a second brain in our stomachs.
In the exploring process, it’s helpful to put aside judgment. This is merely the exploration phase, the time when you get to know a little more about the topic or issue or field that sparked your interest. There’s no lifetime commitment called for, simply information gathering. When you start to explore a new field, by definition you know very little about it. In gathering more information, you will start to be affected by the new information – it may resonate with you and spur you on to learn more, or you will shy away from further exploration. A gut reaction is a fantastic guide during your “information gathering.” Scientists have found that we actually have a second brain in our stomachs.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
The Important Things
I have so much to do, I can't seem to make time for anything new - even if it's to follow my dreams and vision! I know it's important but I just can't get to everything.
I hear this all the time from friends and colleagues when I suggest that they set a goal for themselves, and make a plan to achieve it. "Sure," they say, "it's easy for you to say...but days just seem to go by filled with so much little stuff that I can't find the time to start my project/plan/vision."
I've said the same things to my coach and friends. Here's what worked for me to disentangle myself from the tangled web of everyday chores and obligations.
First, I give myself permission to do just a little bit - hopefully every day. If not every day, then a few times a week. If not a few times a week, then once or twice a week. The frequency doesn't matter! What matters is just doing something toward my vision.
Second, I allow myself to spend just 10 minutes on the vision. I didn't have to devote an hour, two hours, half a day - not even a half-hour. Just 10 minutes. Period. That gives me such a feeling of satisfaction, I want that feeling again. I am motivated to spend another 10 minutes another day.
Third, I accept that achieving my vision will take time AND that I will get there if I am patient with myself. Guaranteed! Gradually, I find more of my actions and attention directed toward my vision. It just takes time to refocus, and much of the refocusing happens subconsciously.
Fourth, I tell myself lots of stories to help me understand what is happening.
For example, I plant seeds and it takes a while for them to germinate. Under the soil, a lot is going on that is invisible - until one day, a shoot pops up and the plant is growing in plain sight. For it to flourish, I continue to water it and give it sunlight.
Similarly, I get an idea and commit to it. Then I stop taking action. I used to feel terrible about it. However, I now know that there is a lot going on subconsciously. One day, I find myself returning to my project with much clearer ideas of how to proceed. I continue to spend time and energy on my project so it will thrive and blossom.
Another story I like is the one about the rocks. Take a large wide-mouthed glass jar and fill it with big stones. Is it full? Well, now pour in a load of pebbles. So is it full? OK, let's pour in sand up to the top. Shake it around. Is it full now? Most people would say yes at step two or three. But...take water and fill the jar. At last it is full.
The moral of this story is to first take care of the big rocks (vision, dreams, family - your top priorities). There always will be room for the smaller ones ("have-tos").
I like to turn that around a bit. If your life is filled with water and sand and pebbles, it's going to be impossible to add some big rocks without making a mess. Yet if you are shifting priorities, you will have some big stones to add to the jar that is your life. That will mean displacing some small things.
Just as water and sand and pebbles have to spill out of the jar to make room for a big rock or two, so too may you have to let go of doing some laundry or cleaning some rooms or baking or cooking. If it doesn't get done when you don't do it, so be it. Once you've got the big rocks in place, you can add back some of the little stuff. Unless, of course, you realize that you'd rather spend that time on having fun!
I hope this piece helps you make room for the things that make you happy and fulfilled.
I hear this all the time from friends and colleagues when I suggest that they set a goal for themselves, and make a plan to achieve it. "Sure," they say, "it's easy for you to say...but days just seem to go by filled with so much little stuff that I can't find the time to start my project/plan/vision."
I've said the same things to my coach and friends. Here's what worked for me to disentangle myself from the tangled web of everyday chores and obligations.
First, I give myself permission to do just a little bit - hopefully every day. If not every day, then a few times a week. If not a few times a week, then once or twice a week. The frequency doesn't matter! What matters is just doing something toward my vision.
Second, I allow myself to spend just 10 minutes on the vision. I didn't have to devote an hour, two hours, half a day - not even a half-hour. Just 10 minutes. Period. That gives me such a feeling of satisfaction, I want that feeling again. I am motivated to spend another 10 minutes another day.
Third, I accept that achieving my vision will take time AND that I will get there if I am patient with myself. Guaranteed! Gradually, I find more of my actions and attention directed toward my vision. It just takes time to refocus, and much of the refocusing happens subconsciously.
Fourth, I tell myself lots of stories to help me understand what is happening.
For example, I plant seeds and it takes a while for them to germinate. Under the soil, a lot is going on that is invisible - until one day, a shoot pops up and the plant is growing in plain sight. For it to flourish, I continue to water it and give it sunlight.
Similarly, I get an idea and commit to it. Then I stop taking action. I used to feel terrible about it. However, I now know that there is a lot going on subconsciously. One day, I find myself returning to my project with much clearer ideas of how to proceed. I continue to spend time and energy on my project so it will thrive and blossom.
Another story I like is the one about the rocks. Take a large wide-mouthed glass jar and fill it with big stones. Is it full? Well, now pour in a load of pebbles. So is it full? OK, let's pour in sand up to the top. Shake it around. Is it full now? Most people would say yes at step two or three. But...take water and fill the jar. At last it is full.
The moral of this story is to first take care of the big rocks (vision, dreams, family - your top priorities). There always will be room for the smaller ones ("have-tos").
I like to turn that around a bit. If your life is filled with water and sand and pebbles, it's going to be impossible to add some big rocks without making a mess. Yet if you are shifting priorities, you will have some big stones to add to the jar that is your life. That will mean displacing some small things.
Just as water and sand and pebbles have to spill out of the jar to make room for a big rock or two, so too may you have to let go of doing some laundry or cleaning some rooms or baking or cooking. If it doesn't get done when you don't do it, so be it. Once you've got the big rocks in place, you can add back some of the little stuff. Unless, of course, you realize that you'd rather spend that time on having fun!
I hope this piece helps you make room for the things that make you happy and fulfilled.
Monday, August 4, 2008
Compensation Negotiations
Take the employer’s viewpoint when negotiating your compensation.
You have a "live with" number for your compensation (salary, bonus and benefits) as well as your "want to have" number. "Live with" is the amount you need to make to meet your basic expenses and feel good about yourself. "Want to have" is what you really would like to make. Your "live with" number depends on your expenses, living situation, and reason for changing jobs. If you are starting in a new field, your "live with" number may be lower than if you are continuing in the same line of work.
Similarly, most employers have a "want to pay" figure and a "stretch" number. Just as you don't want to go below your "live with" number, so too do employers not want to go above their "stretch" number. Perhaps you can negotiate fewer hours for the same pay. This strategy won't succeed, however, if it significantly changes the scope of the job.
It's a set up for failure to get an employer to negotiate away or give up on something. You may get your way temporarily but there will be resentment on the employer’s side and eventually pressure to do the very thing that was negotiated away.
Likewise, if you accept pay below your "live with" number, you will eventually resent the employer and your work load. It's far better to turn down the job, knowing that the right one will eventually come along.
Obviously, take the job if you need one NOW and the only one you can find pays you less than your "live with" number. Just go in with your eyes wide open, knowing that you made the choice to take less than you are worth and therefore there is no good reason for you to be resentful. Do a great job in order to feel good about yourself and perhaps impress the employer. Plus, be willing to keep looking.
Remember, too, that employers will know on some level that they struck a bad bargain by giving you less than you wanted. They may expect you to leave soon, they may end up letting you go so as not to have a "bad apple" in the mix, or they may try to find more money for you if you're really a good employee. What happens is largely up to you and your attitude.
You have a "live with" number for your compensation (salary, bonus and benefits) as well as your "want to have" number. "Live with" is the amount you need to make to meet your basic expenses and feel good about yourself. "Want to have" is what you really would like to make. Your "live with" number depends on your expenses, living situation, and reason for changing jobs. If you are starting in a new field, your "live with" number may be lower than if you are continuing in the same line of work.
Similarly, most employers have a "want to pay" figure and a "stretch" number. Just as you don't want to go below your "live with" number, so too do employers not want to go above their "stretch" number. Perhaps you can negotiate fewer hours for the same pay. This strategy won't succeed, however, if it significantly changes the scope of the job.
It's a set up for failure to get an employer to negotiate away or give up on something. You may get your way temporarily but there will be resentment on the employer’s side and eventually pressure to do the very thing that was negotiated away.
Likewise, if you accept pay below your "live with" number, you will eventually resent the employer and your work load. It's far better to turn down the job, knowing that the right one will eventually come along.
Obviously, take the job if you need one NOW and the only one you can find pays you less than your "live with" number. Just go in with your eyes wide open, knowing that you made the choice to take less than you are worth and therefore there is no good reason for you to be resentful. Do a great job in order to feel good about yourself and perhaps impress the employer. Plus, be willing to keep looking.
Remember, too, that employers will know on some level that they struck a bad bargain by giving you less than you wanted. They may expect you to leave soon, they may end up letting you go so as not to have a "bad apple" in the mix, or they may try to find more money for you if you're really a good employee. What happens is largely up to you and your attitude.
Friday, August 1, 2008
Resumes that Rock: Part 2
RESUME CONTENT
Your resume is a marketing document. Its job is to position you to get your "right fit" work. Thus, its content is crucial. It must convey to potential employers exactly what you have to offer them, as well as the results you are likely to produce for them based on your past record of accomplishments. Here's how to do that.
PROFILE
To begin, I advocate putting a profile at the very start of the resume, just under your name and contact information. A profile is not an objective (of course you want a job), nor is it a litany of your skills (boring!). It's a succinct description of who you are in the workplace.
Your profile presents your unique value proposition – what you love to do and are good at doing, the skills you want to use in the future, and the attributes you want to highlight. Your profile also will capture your personality through a judicious use of adjectives. In sum, your profile conveys the substance and flavor of who you are in the workplace.
In some ways, the process of creating the profile is more important than the final product. Developing it gives you the chance to think carefully about your "unique value proposition." In fact, the reader will usually catch the first five or six words of the profile and then move on to Experience. They might come back to it but even if they don't, the profile will make an impression. It says that you've thought about and know who you are.
Everything you say in your profile must be backed up by your accomplishments, which are listed under each employer and job. Essentially, the profile is the thesis that you then go on to prove with concrete examples. It also is useful as a way to ensure that your resume is internally consistent in terms of the message you intend to convey.
BODY OF RESUME
The first thing read by a prospective employer is the name of the company for which you worked. Then they usually will glance at the title and years worked - some will read title first while others read years worked first.
Here's the order of information that I recommend for the basic information:
* Employer's name first, in bold, followed by its location, not in bold. Use the city in which employer is/was located. Only include the state if the city is not immediately recognizable e.g. Wareham, MA, or is easily confused with something else, e.g. Springfield, MO vs. Springfield, IL vs. Springfield, MA. Otherwise, New York or Boston or Chicago or Los Angeles is sufficient.
* Dates of employment, not in bold, on the same text line as the employer's name and location. The dates should be tabbed over so they are on the far right of the page, preferably lined up with the right side of your address block.
If you worked at the company in more than one position, put the complete block of time over the far right. Next to each position title you can put in parentheses the dates you held that position. For example, Vice President, Sales (3/02 to 7/05).
Job titles can either be grouped together if your job responsibilities were substantially the same with the most recent encompassing the previous responsibilities plus more. If the jobs were substantially different, I treat each one as a separate job under the same employer.
* Title of your position, in bold and italics, directly underneath the employer name and location.
My experience is that most readers go through the entire resume once just glancing at employer, years and title. If all seems to be complete and consistent, then they glance at education to see if you have any degrees. So make sure you have no holes in time, and no major typos!
Only after that first quick read will they go back to look at individual jobs, starting with your most recent one first. After rereading your employer's name and title, usually readers will move to the body of the entry. Here's what it should contain:
* a brief paragraph describing your job
* bullet points that highlight your accomplishments
JOB DESCRIPTION
In a four to six line paragraph that starts on the line directly underneath the title of your position, briefly describe the company you work for and your job responsibilities. Say "Led all communications and marketing efforts for Fortune 1000 technology firm (STOCK SYMBOL)" or "Oversaw day to day operations for 45 year old non-profit teaching literacy to adult New Yorkers" or "Managed entire recruiting and on-boarding process for 300 person homeless services agency."
Use as many numbers as possible to give readers a good idea of the scope and depth of your responsibilities. For example, say "oversaw $3.5 million advertising budget" or "supervised team of 12, with four direct reports."
Readers' eyes are drawn first to numbers, then to CAPS, then to bold. Italics are rarely an eye-catcher, so use them only to indicate the title of an article or project, not for anything substantive.
BULLETS
Bullets are for accomplishments. I recommend limiting yourself to 5-7 bullets for your most recent job, 4-5 for your next most recent, maximum 2 for the next most recent and none for the oldest ones. Quantifying these bullets is important. Those are the things that will get you the interview. The interview allows you to fill in more detail and also to talk about accomplishments that weren't listed.
Here are my tips for great accomplishment bullets:
* Lead with the results and impact of your work, when writing accomplishments. Use active, directionally positive words like "increased," "improved," "advanced," "optimized," "enhanced" and "expanded."
* Use numbers as much as possible, especially with dollar signs and percentage signs; they are real eye-catchers and speak to many employers' focus on the bottom line.
* Split the accomplishment into "what" and "how": the impact or result, and how you achieved that result. For example, "Increased revenue year over year by 80%, through redeploying sales team."
* Ask “so what” to get to the impact of whatever activity you want to include. If you want to include it, it’s probably important but only if you can somehow tie it to an impact that is somehow measurable – as in “increased” and “improved” and “enhanced” and “expanded” – or gives clear evidence of major responsibility, as in “directed,” “led,” “managed,” “launched,” and “created.”
* Brevity is best. Limit each bullet to one, maximum two lines.
* Give leading information to cause the reader to ask a follow up question. Remember, the point of a resume is to get you an interview. The interview is where the reader can ask you to explain how you redeployed the sales team and why that resulted in 80% revenue increase.
* Only include things you really want to do again – similar or greater scope of responsibility, the type of work or project, specific skills you really want to use again, or attributes you want people to notice.
The next post will address the remaining parts of a resume: Education, Affiliations, Recognition, and other sections that might be relevant to you.
Your resume is a marketing document. Its job is to position you to get your "right fit" work. Thus, its content is crucial. It must convey to potential employers exactly what you have to offer them, as well as the results you are likely to produce for them based on your past record of accomplishments. Here's how to do that.
PROFILE
To begin, I advocate putting a profile at the very start of the resume, just under your name and contact information. A profile is not an objective (of course you want a job), nor is it a litany of your skills (boring!). It's a succinct description of who you are in the workplace.
Your profile presents your unique value proposition – what you love to do and are good at doing, the skills you want to use in the future, and the attributes you want to highlight. Your profile also will capture your personality through a judicious use of adjectives. In sum, your profile conveys the substance and flavor of who you are in the workplace.
In some ways, the process of creating the profile is more important than the final product. Developing it gives you the chance to think carefully about your "unique value proposition." In fact, the reader will usually catch the first five or six words of the profile and then move on to Experience. They might come back to it but even if they don't, the profile will make an impression. It says that you've thought about and know who you are.
Everything you say in your profile must be backed up by your accomplishments, which are listed under each employer and job. Essentially, the profile is the thesis that you then go on to prove with concrete examples. It also is useful as a way to ensure that your resume is internally consistent in terms of the message you intend to convey.
BODY OF RESUME
The first thing read by a prospective employer is the name of the company for which you worked. Then they usually will glance at the title and years worked - some will read title first while others read years worked first.
Here's the order of information that I recommend for the basic information:
* Employer's name first, in bold, followed by its location, not in bold. Use the city in which employer is/was located. Only include the state if the city is not immediately recognizable e.g. Wareham, MA, or is easily confused with something else, e.g. Springfield, MO vs. Springfield, IL vs. Springfield, MA. Otherwise, New York or Boston or Chicago or Los Angeles is sufficient.
* Dates of employment, not in bold, on the same text line as the employer's name and location. The dates should be tabbed over so they are on the far right of the page, preferably lined up with the right side of your address block.
If you worked at the company in more than one position, put the complete block of time over the far right. Next to each position title you can put in parentheses the dates you held that position. For example, Vice President, Sales (3/02 to 7/05).
Job titles can either be grouped together if your job responsibilities were substantially the same with the most recent encompassing the previous responsibilities plus more. If the jobs were substantially different, I treat each one as a separate job under the same employer.
* Title of your position, in bold and italics, directly underneath the employer name and location.
My experience is that most readers go through the entire resume once just glancing at employer, years and title. If all seems to be complete and consistent, then they glance at education to see if you have any degrees. So make sure you have no holes in time, and no major typos!
Only after that first quick read will they go back to look at individual jobs, starting with your most recent one first. After rereading your employer's name and title, usually readers will move to the body of the entry. Here's what it should contain:
* a brief paragraph describing your job
* bullet points that highlight your accomplishments
JOB DESCRIPTION
In a four to six line paragraph that starts on the line directly underneath the title of your position, briefly describe the company you work for and your job responsibilities. Say "Led all communications and marketing efforts for Fortune 1000 technology firm (STOCK SYMBOL)" or "Oversaw day to day operations for 45 year old non-profit teaching literacy to adult New Yorkers" or "Managed entire recruiting and on-boarding process for 300 person homeless services agency."
Use as many numbers as possible to give readers a good idea of the scope and depth of your responsibilities. For example, say "oversaw $3.5 million advertising budget" or "supervised team of 12, with four direct reports."
Readers' eyes are drawn first to numbers, then to CAPS, then to bold. Italics are rarely an eye-catcher, so use them only to indicate the title of an article or project, not for anything substantive.
BULLETS
Bullets are for accomplishments. I recommend limiting yourself to 5-7 bullets for your most recent job, 4-5 for your next most recent, maximum 2 for the next most recent and none for the oldest ones. Quantifying these bullets is important. Those are the things that will get you the interview. The interview allows you to fill in more detail and also to talk about accomplishments that weren't listed.
Here are my tips for great accomplishment bullets:
* Lead with the results and impact of your work, when writing accomplishments. Use active, directionally positive words like "increased," "improved," "advanced," "optimized," "enhanced" and "expanded."
* Use numbers as much as possible, especially with dollar signs and percentage signs; they are real eye-catchers and speak to many employers' focus on the bottom line.
* Split the accomplishment into "what" and "how": the impact or result, and how you achieved that result. For example, "Increased revenue year over year by 80%, through redeploying sales team."
* Ask “so what” to get to the impact of whatever activity you want to include. If you want to include it, it’s probably important but only if you can somehow tie it to an impact that is somehow measurable – as in “increased” and “improved” and “enhanced” and “expanded” – or gives clear evidence of major responsibility, as in “directed,” “led,” “managed,” “launched,” and “created.”
* Brevity is best. Limit each bullet to one, maximum two lines.
* Give leading information to cause the reader to ask a follow up question. Remember, the point of a resume is to get you an interview. The interview is where the reader can ask you to explain how you redeployed the sales team and why that resulted in 80% revenue increase.
* Only include things you really want to do again – similar or greater scope of responsibility, the type of work or project, specific skills you really want to use again, or attributes you want people to notice.
The next post will address the remaining parts of a resume: Education, Affiliations, Recognition, and other sections that might be relevant to you.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Change ingrained habits
"Sally" is very unhappy in her current job. She has little autonomy and lots of people looking over her shoulder, eager to criticize what she's doing and how she's doing it. The last straw was getting a reprimand for not appearing "concerned about getting things done" despite the fact that she always gets everything done. So Sally wants to leave and get a job where she has more independence and is more valued.
Right now, Sally doesn’t know exactly what she wants to do. She has some ideas but is still pretty vague about what she might investigate. Thus, she needs to gather more information. For instance, she needs to look at different jobs and industries to get more familiar with what is possible and what kinds of jobs are out there. In addition, Sally is in the habit of deferring to other people's wishes for her and has little experience pursuing her own dreams and wishes.
I came up with an assignment to help Sally begin to get more specific about things instead of vague, and to identify some things she can actually do something about NOW - thus beginning to act on her own behalf. The assignment is to:
Get very specific about all the things she is tolerating in her life - the things, people, situations she allows in her life that bug her, that are not optimal for her happiness and fulfillment.
We'll see what she comes up with, and how willing she is to do something different in order to get different results.
*name changed
Right now, Sally doesn’t know exactly what she wants to do. She has some ideas but is still pretty vague about what she might investigate. Thus, she needs to gather more information. For instance, she needs to look at different jobs and industries to get more familiar with what is possible and what kinds of jobs are out there. In addition, Sally is in the habit of deferring to other people's wishes for her and has little experience pursuing her own dreams and wishes.
I came up with an assignment to help Sally begin to get more specific about things instead of vague, and to identify some things she can actually do something about NOW - thus beginning to act on her own behalf. The assignment is to:
Get very specific about all the things she is tolerating in her life - the things, people, situations she allows in her life that bug her, that are not optimal for her happiness and fulfillment.
We'll see what she comes up with, and how willing she is to do something different in order to get different results.
*name changed
Monday, July 28, 2008
August is the Perfect Time to Prepare
Use this coming month to prepare for job searches this fall. Marc Cenedella, Founder & CEO of TheLadders.com wrote this on his e-mail this morning:
The next 5 weeks are the perfect time to take advantage of the slow summer months and get your resume, your pitch, your interview, and your job hunt plans in order.
He's absolutely right - because while you're working on your resume, employers are finalizing job descriptions and postings that will start to appear right before and right after Labor Day. Many employers want to hire people right away to handle the expected heavy work load from late September to early December. If you're ready with your resume and cover letter, you'll be one of the first applicants to reach the employer.
It does help to be one of the first to cross the transom, especially in this economy. Employers are always looking for people who really want to work for their specific company, in their specific industry. Applying early in the search process indicates that you are motivated, even eager, to do this job.
Early application means that you stand a better chance of getting an interview if employers use a rolling search process - interviewing candidates until they get the right person. My experience is that very few employers actually wait to review resumes and start interviews until the advertised "final date for application." Thus, it's not to your advantage to wait until the very end of the process.
Don't despair, however, if you happen to see a posting that is close to its "end date" and you think the job is perfect for you. If you are really passionate about the work and the company, you can still put together a compelling cover letter. The cover letter should emphasize two things up front:
1) you just began your search process; and
2) you are so glad to have found this posting because it is absolutely the perfect position for you.
Stating this in the first paragraph of your cover letter can cause someone in HR to give your resume a look. And if they haven't already found the perfect person (or the "good enough" person), you may be in luck.
Remember the old saying that "luck favors the prepared" and have that resume ready to go. August is the perfect time to prepare to land your "right fit" job!
The next 5 weeks are the perfect time to take advantage of the slow summer months and get your resume, your pitch, your interview, and your job hunt plans in order.
He's absolutely right - because while you're working on your resume, employers are finalizing job descriptions and postings that will start to appear right before and right after Labor Day. Many employers want to hire people right away to handle the expected heavy work load from late September to early December. If you're ready with your resume and cover letter, you'll be one of the first applicants to reach the employer.
It does help to be one of the first to cross the transom, especially in this economy. Employers are always looking for people who really want to work for their specific company, in their specific industry. Applying early in the search process indicates that you are motivated, even eager, to do this job.
Early application means that you stand a better chance of getting an interview if employers use a rolling search process - interviewing candidates until they get the right person. My experience is that very few employers actually wait to review resumes and start interviews until the advertised "final date for application." Thus, it's not to your advantage to wait until the very end of the process.
Don't despair, however, if you happen to see a posting that is close to its "end date" and you think the job is perfect for you. If you are really passionate about the work and the company, you can still put together a compelling cover letter. The cover letter should emphasize two things up front:
1) you just began your search process; and
2) you are so glad to have found this posting because it is absolutely the perfect position for you.
Stating this in the first paragraph of your cover letter can cause someone in HR to give your resume a look. And if they haven't already found the perfect person (or the "good enough" person), you may be in luck.
Remember the old saying that "luck favors the prepared" and have that resume ready to go. August is the perfect time to prepare to land your "right fit" job!
Monday, July 14, 2008
Non-Profit Executive Directors and COOs or Deputies
Recently, I learned that a former colleague is hiring a Deputy Executive Director. It seems he's been there a long time, and either wants or needs to let go of the management reins a bit. Whether it's "wants" or "needs" will have some impact on the level of difficulty he has in following through on this intention.
"Wants to" implies that he's thought long and hard about his responsibilities and realizes that his time is better spent doing more high level things. He already has an agenda and things he wants to concentrate on, opportunities he wants to pursue, expansion he wants to lead. So while letting go will be difficult (simply because he's been doing it one way for a long time), he has a goal toward which he is headed. He is moving toward something. The person hired has a good chance of succeeding.
"Needs to" implies that he is overwhelmed with his responsibilities and needs someone to take over the day-to-day management. It may be that people on his Board of Directors are urging this step. It could be that he hired a management consultant who recommended creating that position. In this case, he is moving away from something and still needs to find what he is moving toward. The transition will be very painful if this is the case, and the person hired may be the "guinea pig" or "sacrificial lamb" who helps the ED figure out what he needs and then is gone (by choice or force).
In either case, the Executive Director in question will really need good chemistry with the person he hires. Giving up some control is difficult for even the best-intentioned ED. The most successful COOs or Deputies are the ones who can put aside their own ego gratification needs and need for control, and concentrate on keeping the ED happy.
There's a delicate balance of keeping them informed and involved at the right level, and doing things they don't need to concern themselves with. Erring toward more information and involvement is better in the beginning, making sure you are aligned re goals and expectations, and what he needs to know about. Even as the COO or Deputy takes on more responsibility, it is incumbent on him/her to continually ensure that s/he is aligned with the ED's goals and thinking. That means "regularly," "consistently," "constantly," and "often." Better safe than sorry, really.
I had a COO who did not do that and it ended badly for her - and was not great for the organization, either. She seemed to want to be co-Executive Director. Unfortunately, I fed that delusion at the beginning and then it was too late to rein her in. There ended up being two competing camps at work - those loyal to me and those to her. When I finally eliminated her position and her, it was really demoralizing to the organization as a whole. Plus I had acquiesced in some misguided decisions in order for her to feel more powerful, decisions that placed the organization in some jeopardy. I had a LOT of fence-mending and organization-building to do to recover from that situation. Today, I'd be clearer at the start that I was not sharing my power; I was delegating some of my power to her. And I'd be willing to let her leave if she didn't like it.
The COO/Deputy is there to be the ED's right hand, meaning that they do things the ED cannot or does not want to do. If the ED wants to be involved in something, the COO/Deputy needs to understand that it's their right to be involved. Certainly, the COO/Deputy can discuss it and try to make sure the ED is involved at a strategic or conceptual level, rather than the level of execution or implementation. That is part of the job, in a way - making sure that the ED is focused on the proper things so as to get the most benefit for the organization. If the ED insists on doing something, however, it's really wisest not to fight with them about it and get on one's high horse about "but that's my job!" It just sounds like whining and annoys the ED, not to mention making him/her think you are trying to shunt them out of the way. Anytime an ED or CEO hears "oh, we'll take care of that for you," a little alarm bell goes off that warns of a power struggle or behind the scenes politicking and positioning. Depending on how often it happens, the ED may get rid of the parties involved.
Would it be nice if the ED was spiritually evolved and not threatened by someone else claiming some power? Sure, and that's a sign that the ED is not long for his or her job. Honestly, it's great to think well of people and curb one's suspicions. However, I've learned through bitter experience that there are just enough people who are not worthy of my trust. Better for me to be on guard just in case. And the people closest to the ED are the biggest threats to the ED's position. So COOs and Deputies who wish to succeed will make darn sure that they never overtly threaten the ED's position, and will seek an ED job elsewhere if they want to move into that position. Because smart EDs sniff out covert power plays and eliminate the threat. I was not smart, that's how I know.
"Wants to" implies that he's thought long and hard about his responsibilities and realizes that his time is better spent doing more high level things. He already has an agenda and things he wants to concentrate on, opportunities he wants to pursue, expansion he wants to lead. So while letting go will be difficult (simply because he's been doing it one way for a long time), he has a goal toward which he is headed. He is moving toward something. The person hired has a good chance of succeeding.
"Needs to" implies that he is overwhelmed with his responsibilities and needs someone to take over the day-to-day management. It may be that people on his Board of Directors are urging this step. It could be that he hired a management consultant who recommended creating that position. In this case, he is moving away from something and still needs to find what he is moving toward. The transition will be very painful if this is the case, and the person hired may be the "guinea pig" or "sacrificial lamb" who helps the ED figure out what he needs and then is gone (by choice or force).
In either case, the Executive Director in question will really need good chemistry with the person he hires. Giving up some control is difficult for even the best-intentioned ED. The most successful COOs or Deputies are the ones who can put aside their own ego gratification needs and need for control, and concentrate on keeping the ED happy.
There's a delicate balance of keeping them informed and involved at the right level, and doing things they don't need to concern themselves with. Erring toward more information and involvement is better in the beginning, making sure you are aligned re goals and expectations, and what he needs to know about. Even as the COO or Deputy takes on more responsibility, it is incumbent on him/her to continually ensure that s/he is aligned with the ED's goals and thinking. That means "regularly," "consistently," "constantly," and "often." Better safe than sorry, really.
I had a COO who did not do that and it ended badly for her - and was not great for the organization, either. She seemed to want to be co-Executive Director. Unfortunately, I fed that delusion at the beginning and then it was too late to rein her in. There ended up being two competing camps at work - those loyal to me and those to her. When I finally eliminated her position and her, it was really demoralizing to the organization as a whole. Plus I had acquiesced in some misguided decisions in order for her to feel more powerful, decisions that placed the organization in some jeopardy. I had a LOT of fence-mending and organization-building to do to recover from that situation. Today, I'd be clearer at the start that I was not sharing my power; I was delegating some of my power to her. And I'd be willing to let her leave if she didn't like it.
The COO/Deputy is there to be the ED's right hand, meaning that they do things the ED cannot or does not want to do. If the ED wants to be involved in something, the COO/Deputy needs to understand that it's their right to be involved. Certainly, the COO/Deputy can discuss it and try to make sure the ED is involved at a strategic or conceptual level, rather than the level of execution or implementation. That is part of the job, in a way - making sure that the ED is focused on the proper things so as to get the most benefit for the organization. If the ED insists on doing something, however, it's really wisest not to fight with them about it and get on one's high horse about "but that's my job!" It just sounds like whining and annoys the ED, not to mention making him/her think you are trying to shunt them out of the way. Anytime an ED or CEO hears "oh, we'll take care of that for you," a little alarm bell goes off that warns of a power struggle or behind the scenes politicking and positioning. Depending on how often it happens, the ED may get rid of the parties involved.
Would it be nice if the ED was spiritually evolved and not threatened by someone else claiming some power? Sure, and that's a sign that the ED is not long for his or her job. Honestly, it's great to think well of people and curb one's suspicions. However, I've learned through bitter experience that there are just enough people who are not worthy of my trust. Better for me to be on guard just in case. And the people closest to the ED are the biggest threats to the ED's position. So COOs and Deputies who wish to succeed will make darn sure that they never overtly threaten the ED's position, and will seek an ED job elsewhere if they want to move into that position. Because smart EDs sniff out covert power plays and eliminate the threat. I was not smart, that's how I know.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Job Interviews are Information-Gathering Opportunities
I am such a believer in getting interviews no matter whether you're 100% sure you want the job. Interviews go two ways, for you are learning as much about the prospective employer as they are learning about you.
A job posting only gives you a hint about a job, and can tell you that there are some aspects that interest you - just as a resume only gives a two-dimensional, very brief picture of you, the applicant. So if you see jobs that might be sort of interesting, I encourage you to apply and see if you get an interview. My blog (www.growhappycoach.blogger.com) has a few posts that list search sites.
I also encourage you to keep an open mind and think about an interview simply as an information-gathering opportunity. Getting an interview doesn't mean you will be offered or will accept the job. It's just one more step along your path to the "right fit."
One person I know just went on an interview and was quite pleasantly surprised to find that, contrary to the horror stories she'd heard about the place, there was a new spirit and new people who want to create a healthy culture and bring in great people (hopefully like her...). Luckily, she had an open mind and went to the interview. Now the job is a serious contender in her search.
Remember, too, that a great cover letter is the way to get an interview. The best cover letters match your "value proposition" to the stated "market need" in the posting and job description. Of course, your resume has to be in top shape. But for people trying to transition into new sectors, or jump up a level, a carefully written cover letter is key. While it may take several hours and drafts to craft a tailored and targeted cover letter, think about it as an investment in your finding the "right fit" job.
A job posting only gives you a hint about a job, and can tell you that there are some aspects that interest you - just as a resume only gives a two-dimensional, very brief picture of you, the applicant. So if you see jobs that might be sort of interesting, I encourage you to apply and see if you get an interview. My blog (www.growhappycoach.blogger.com) has a few posts that list search sites.
I also encourage you to keep an open mind and think about an interview simply as an information-gathering opportunity. Getting an interview doesn't mean you will be offered or will accept the job. It's just one more step along your path to the "right fit."
One person I know just went on an interview and was quite pleasantly surprised to find that, contrary to the horror stories she'd heard about the place, there was a new spirit and new people who want to create a healthy culture and bring in great people (hopefully like her...). Luckily, she had an open mind and went to the interview. Now the job is a serious contender in her search.
Remember, too, that a great cover letter is the way to get an interview. The best cover letters match your "value proposition" to the stated "market need" in the posting and job description. Of course, your resume has to be in top shape. But for people trying to transition into new sectors, or jump up a level, a carefully written cover letter is key. While it may take several hours and drafts to craft a tailored and targeted cover letter, think about it as an investment in your finding the "right fit" job.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Resumes that Rock: Part 2
RESUME CONTENT
Your resume is a marketing document. Its job is to position you to get your "right fit" work. Thus, its content is crucial. It must convey to potential employers exactly what you have to offer them, as well as the results you are likely to produce for them based on your past record of accomplishments. Here's how to do that.
PROFILE
To begin, I advocate putting a profile at the very start of the resume, just under your name and contact information. A profile is not an objective (of course you want a job), nor is it a litany of your skills (boring!). It's a succinct description of who you are in the workplace.
Your profile presents your unique value proposition – what you love to do and are good at doing, the skills you want to use in the future, and the attributes you want to highlight. Your profile also will capture your personality through a judicious use of adjectives. In sum, your profile conveys the substance and flavor of who you are in the workplace.
In some ways, the process of creating the profile is more important than the final product. Developing it gives you the chance to think carefully about your "unique value proposition." In fact, the reader will usually catch the first five or six words of the profile and then move on to Experience. They might come back to it but even if they don't, the profile will make an impression. It says that you've thought about and know who you are.
Everything you say in your profile must be backed up by your accomplishments, which are listed under each employer and job. Essentially, the profile is the thesis that you then go on to prove with concrete examples. It also is useful as a way to ensure that your resume is internally consistent in terms of the message you intend to convey.
BODY OF RESUME
The first thing read by a prospective employer is the name of the company for which you worked. Then they usually will glance at the title and years worked - some will read title first while others read years worked first.
Here's the order of information that I recommend for the basic information:
* Employer's name first, in bold, followed by its location, not in bold. Use the city in which employer is/was located. Only include the state if the city is not immediately recognizable e.g. Wareham, MA, or is easily confused with something else, e.g. Springfield, MO vs. Springfield, IL vs. Springfield, MA. Otherwise, New York or Boston or Chicago or Los Angeles is sufficient.
* Dates of employment, not in bold, on the same text line as the employer's name and location. The dates should be tabbed over so they are on the far right of the page, preferably lined up with the right side of your address block.
If you worked at the company in more than one position, put the complete block of time over the far right. Next to each position title you can put in parentheses the dates you held that position. For example, Vice President, Sales (3/02 to 7/05).
Job titles can either be grouped together if your job responsibilities were substantially the same with the most recent encompassing the previous responsibilities plus more. If the jobs were substantially different, I treat each one as a separate job under the same employer.
* Title of your position, in bold and italics, directly underneath the employer name and location.
My experience is that most readers go through the entire resume once just glancing at employer, years and title. If all seems to be complete and consistent, then they glance at education to see if you have any degrees. So make sure you have no holes in time, and no major typos!
Only after that first quick read will they go back to look at individual jobs, starting with your most recent one first. After rereading your employer's name and title, usually readers will move to the body of the entry. Here's what it should contain:
* a brief paragraph describing your job
* bullet points that highlight your accomplishments
JOB DESCRIPTION
In a four to six line paragraph that starts on the line directly underneath the title of your position, briefly describe the company you work for and your job responsibilities. Say "Led all communications and marketing efforts for Fortune 1000 technology firm (STOCK SYMBOL)" or "Oversaw day to day operations for 45 year old non-profit teaching literacy to adult New Yorkers" or "Managed entire recruiting and on-boarding process for 300 person homeless services agency."
Use as many numbers as possible to give readers a good idea of the scope and depth of your responsibilities. For example, say "oversaw $3.5 million advertising budget" or "supervised team of 12, with four direct reports."
Readers' eyes are drawn first to numbers, then to CAPS, then to bold. Italics are rarely an eye-catcher, so use them only to indicate the title of an article or project, not for anything substantive.
BULLETS
Bullets are for accomplishments. I recommend limiting yourself to 5-7 bullets for your most recent job, 4-5 for your next most recent, maximum 2 for the next most recent and none for the oldest ones.
Here are my tips for great accomplishment bullets:
* Lead with the results and impact of your work, when writing accomplishments. Use active, directionally positive words like "increased," "improved," "advanced," "optimized," "enhanced" and "expanded."
* Use numbers as much as possible, especially with dollar signs and percentage signs; they are real eye-catchers and speak to many employers' focus on the bottom line.
* Split the accomplishment into "what" and "how": the impact or result, and how you achieved that result. For example, "Increased revenue year over year by 80%, through redeploying sales team."
* Ask “so what” to get to the impact of whatever activity you want to include. If you want to include it, it’s probably important but only if you can somehow tie it to an impact that is somehow measurable – as in “increased” and “improved” and “enhanced” and “expanded” – or gives clear evidence of major responsibility, as in “directed,” “led,” “managed,” “launched,” and “created.”
* Brevity is best. Limit each bullet to one, maximum two lines.
* Give leading information to cause the reader to ask a follow up question. Remember, the point of a resume is to get you an interview. The interview is where the reader can ask you to explain how you redeployed the sales team and why that resulted in 80% revenue increase.
* Only include things you really want to do again – similar or greater scope of responsibility, the type of work or project, specific skills you really want to use again, or attributes you want people to notice.
The next post will address the remaining parts of a resume: Education, Affiliations, Recognition, and other sections that might be relevant to you.
Your resume is a marketing document. Its job is to position you to get your "right fit" work. Thus, its content is crucial. It must convey to potential employers exactly what you have to offer them, as well as the results you are likely to produce for them based on your past record of accomplishments. Here's how to do that.
PROFILE
To begin, I advocate putting a profile at the very start of the resume, just under your name and contact information. A profile is not an objective (of course you want a job), nor is it a litany of your skills (boring!). It's a succinct description of who you are in the workplace.
Your profile presents your unique value proposition – what you love to do and are good at doing, the skills you want to use in the future, and the attributes you want to highlight. Your profile also will capture your personality through a judicious use of adjectives. In sum, your profile conveys the substance and flavor of who you are in the workplace.
In some ways, the process of creating the profile is more important than the final product. Developing it gives you the chance to think carefully about your "unique value proposition." In fact, the reader will usually catch the first five or six words of the profile and then move on to Experience. They might come back to it but even if they don't, the profile will make an impression. It says that you've thought about and know who you are.
Everything you say in your profile must be backed up by your accomplishments, which are listed under each employer and job. Essentially, the profile is the thesis that you then go on to prove with concrete examples. It also is useful as a way to ensure that your resume is internally consistent in terms of the message you intend to convey.
BODY OF RESUME
The first thing read by a prospective employer is the name of the company for which you worked. Then they usually will glance at the title and years worked - some will read title first while others read years worked first.
Here's the order of information that I recommend for the basic information:
* Employer's name first, in bold, followed by its location, not in bold. Use the city in which employer is/was located. Only include the state if the city is not immediately recognizable e.g. Wareham, MA, or is easily confused with something else, e.g. Springfield, MO vs. Springfield, IL vs. Springfield, MA. Otherwise, New York or Boston or Chicago or Los Angeles is sufficient.
* Dates of employment, not in bold, on the same text line as the employer's name and location. The dates should be tabbed over so they are on the far right of the page, preferably lined up with the right side of your address block.
If you worked at the company in more than one position, put the complete block of time over the far right. Next to each position title you can put in parentheses the dates you held that position. For example, Vice President, Sales (3/02 to 7/05).
Job titles can either be grouped together if your job responsibilities were substantially the same with the most recent encompassing the previous responsibilities plus more. If the jobs were substantially different, I treat each one as a separate job under the same employer.
* Title of your position, in bold and italics, directly underneath the employer name and location.
My experience is that most readers go through the entire resume once just glancing at employer, years and title. If all seems to be complete and consistent, then they glance at education to see if you have any degrees. So make sure you have no holes in time, and no major typos!
Only after that first quick read will they go back to look at individual jobs, starting with your most recent one first. After rereading your employer's name and title, usually readers will move to the body of the entry. Here's what it should contain:
* a brief paragraph describing your job
* bullet points that highlight your accomplishments
JOB DESCRIPTION
In a four to six line paragraph that starts on the line directly underneath the title of your position, briefly describe the company you work for and your job responsibilities. Say "Led all communications and marketing efforts for Fortune 1000 technology firm (STOCK SYMBOL)" or "Oversaw day to day operations for 45 year old non-profit teaching literacy to adult New Yorkers" or "Managed entire recruiting and on-boarding process for 300 person homeless services agency."
Use as many numbers as possible to give readers a good idea of the scope and depth of your responsibilities. For example, say "oversaw $3.5 million advertising budget" or "supervised team of 12, with four direct reports."
Readers' eyes are drawn first to numbers, then to CAPS, then to bold. Italics are rarely an eye-catcher, so use them only to indicate the title of an article or project, not for anything substantive.
BULLETS
Bullets are for accomplishments. I recommend limiting yourself to 5-7 bullets for your most recent job, 4-5 for your next most recent, maximum 2 for the next most recent and none for the oldest ones.
Here are my tips for great accomplishment bullets:
* Lead with the results and impact of your work, when writing accomplishments. Use active, directionally positive words like "increased," "improved," "advanced," "optimized," "enhanced" and "expanded."
* Use numbers as much as possible, especially with dollar signs and percentage signs; they are real eye-catchers and speak to many employers' focus on the bottom line.
* Split the accomplishment into "what" and "how": the impact or result, and how you achieved that result. For example, "Increased revenue year over year by 80%, through redeploying sales team."
* Ask “so what” to get to the impact of whatever activity you want to include. If you want to include it, it’s probably important but only if you can somehow tie it to an impact that is somehow measurable – as in “increased” and “improved” and “enhanced” and “expanded” – or gives clear evidence of major responsibility, as in “directed,” “led,” “managed,” “launched,” and “created.”
* Brevity is best. Limit each bullet to one, maximum two lines.
* Give leading information to cause the reader to ask a follow up question. Remember, the point of a resume is to get you an interview. The interview is where the reader can ask you to explain how you redeployed the sales team and why that resulted in 80% revenue increase.
* Only include things you really want to do again – similar or greater scope of responsibility, the type of work or project, specific skills you really want to use again, or attributes you want people to notice.
The next post will address the remaining parts of a resume: Education, Affiliations, Recognition, and other sections that might be relevant to you.
Monday, July 7, 2008
Some thoughts on the for-profit invasion of the non-profit world
The influx of for-profit people into the non-profit field - as Board members, funders, "venture philanthropists," "social entrepreneurs," and staff - can be very a difficult for non-profit staff leaders who have spent a lot of time learning their field and craft. Perhaps it's less frustrating for younger leaders who grew up with the Robin Hood Foundation as part of the landscape that defines philanthropy and non-profit performance these days.
It's not pleasant, however, to be told that one's knowledge, expertise and experience counts for less than squat in the face of dollars and measurements. Nor is it pleasant to see newer folks be brought up short by the unexpected complexities of solving pervasive, long-standing, and seemingly universal problems - problems like poverty, child abuse, hunger, school drop outs, crime, infectious disease, and mental illness.
It gives me no pleasure to see people find out that their neat, slogan-worthy approach doesn't work with everyone or for very long. Because we've now wasted a lot of time on yet another band-aid approach to a problem - that accomplishes basically what the older approaches did because they all engaged in "creaming" - working with the most likely to succeed. We could have been using that time and those immense financial resources to implement social change based on the lessons learned after the cream was skimmed.
There's such an immense amount of information that tells us that poverty will not be eradicated unless there are major structural changes in our economy. That women will not be able to leave welfare and optimally care for their children unless they have satisfying family-friendly jobs paying at least $40,000 a year, subsidized high-quality child care, safe neighborhoods, and easily accessible shopping - especially for healthy, affordable food. That kids will drop out of school unless they perceive it as worth their while instead of simply a time-wasting, boring treadmill designed to make adults feel good about themselves and to keep kids in line and quiet. The list goes on.
Smart people work in the non-profit field and have done so for years. That there have been not-so-smart and not-so-ethical people also in the field has been used as a reason for the new "venture philanthropists" to disrespect those who've worked hard for so many years.
We in the non-profit field are the original "do more for less" people. Give us more money and we can do so much more. Give us the money to run our organizations like you run your businesses and see what we can do. Chances are we'll decide to spend the money on services instead of car service and client lunches. And even more likely is that our for-profit Board members will resist spending any of that money on the infrastructure that would really help us run like a business and increase our effectiveness - like computers and evaluation and planning and conferences and periodicals.
It's not pleasant, however, to be told that one's knowledge, expertise and experience counts for less than squat in the face of dollars and measurements. Nor is it pleasant to see newer folks be brought up short by the unexpected complexities of solving pervasive, long-standing, and seemingly universal problems - problems like poverty, child abuse, hunger, school drop outs, crime, infectious disease, and mental illness.
It gives me no pleasure to see people find out that their neat, slogan-worthy approach doesn't work with everyone or for very long. Because we've now wasted a lot of time on yet another band-aid approach to a problem - that accomplishes basically what the older approaches did because they all engaged in "creaming" - working with the most likely to succeed. We could have been using that time and those immense financial resources to implement social change based on the lessons learned after the cream was skimmed.
There's such an immense amount of information that tells us that poverty will not be eradicated unless there are major structural changes in our economy. That women will not be able to leave welfare and optimally care for their children unless they have satisfying family-friendly jobs paying at least $40,000 a year, subsidized high-quality child care, safe neighborhoods, and easily accessible shopping - especially for healthy, affordable food. That kids will drop out of school unless they perceive it as worth their while instead of simply a time-wasting, boring treadmill designed to make adults feel good about themselves and to keep kids in line and quiet. The list goes on.
Smart people work in the non-profit field and have done so for years. That there have been not-so-smart and not-so-ethical people also in the field has been used as a reason for the new "venture philanthropists" to disrespect those who've worked hard for so many years.
We in the non-profit field are the original "do more for less" people. Give us more money and we can do so much more. Give us the money to run our organizations like you run your businesses and see what we can do. Chances are we'll decide to spend the money on services instead of car service and client lunches. And even more likely is that our for-profit Board members will resist spending any of that money on the infrastructure that would really help us run like a business and increase our effectiveness - like computers and evaluation and planning and conferences and periodicals.
Resumes that Rock: Part 1
You're looking for a job, so you put together a resume. Do you know what your job is when you put together that resume? Sure, a resume summarizes all your work experience, education, and related facts and activities (the word resume comes from the French for "summary"). More important, a resume's job is to make it really, really easy for a reviewer to read and understand that information. So your job is to do all the work for the reviewer. That is critical!! I'll explain how to do that.
Rocking resumes have two essential components: content and format. Both are vital to an applicant's chances of getting an interview. This section deals with format.
Resume Format
You can have the greatest content in the world and still not get interviewed - if you have a bad resume format. The resume format I use is very effective because it's simple, direct, easily sent electronically, and logical to read. It showcases all the wonderful aspects of your experience.
Use an ordinary font, one that comes standard on Word software. My favorite to use is Garamond, sometimes referred to as the "more elegant version" of Times Roman. Serif typefaces, like Times Roman or Garamond, are normally easier for people to read, as well as very familiar and sort of expected. For Times Roman, use at least size 11 font; Garamond is smaller, so size 12 is better. If you really want to use a sans serif typeface, go with one that is elegant while commonplace. While many people use Arial, I think it's boring because of its ubiquity. Tahoma and Verdana are good alternatives, and Trebuchet MS is my favorite because its spacing makes for an easy read. For these typefaces, use at least a size 11 and preferably a size 12 font for Arial and Trebuchet.
One woman I knew sent me her resume for review. A previous version used a very fancy but totally undecipherable type face, so I was quite pleased (though surprised) when the next version used Times Roman. I made comments, sent it back, and was very surprised when she asked me why I changed her type face. Apparently, the type face she chose was so uncommon that Word simply switched to the default typeface. That's why I'm so cautious about formatting, because it can often get garbled.
Avoid fancy formatting, including any lines, text boxes, macros and offbeat tabs. The goal is to make it easy for the reader to read EXACTLY what you want them to read. Fancy formatting often gets garbled, such as bullets on your screen turning into question marks on someone else's. The last thing anyone should see is a question mark before one of your accomplishments. While they may understand that it's a formatting error, it is likely to raise a question about your competence, even subliminally.
It's best to avoid lines for the simple reason that a prospective employer needs to see you as a whole package, not as separate pieces. Lines are visual cues to compartmentalize things, separate you from your accomplishments, skip something or cut something out. You've probably put in a line because you want to look like you understand design or want to stand out. If you're really a designer, you understand that lines are usually intended to create clear distinctions between things. For example, a box within a larger article generally is for a complementary yet unnecessary piece of information - or for an ad, or some other extraneous item. NOTHING in your resume is unnecessary, so keep it visually one whole document, all of which is vital.
Be consistent and predictable throughout your resume. Use a single typeface. Use the same format for each job experience. Skip the same number of lines between jobs and sections. Whatever you decide, stick to it. Otherwise it comes across as sloppy - not creative.
Put your employer's name first, followed by the city and then the date on the same line. Bold the employer's name, but not the city or the date. Tab over for the date. On the next line, put your job title in bold and italics.
Line up your dates on the right side of the page. All should be aligned with each other, and all should have the same format. It's up to you whether you use 10/02-10/04 or October 2002-October 2004. I prefer the former simply because it takes up less space and leaves a fair amount of white space between the name of the employer and the dates worked.
Describe your basic responsibilities in a short paragraph immediately under your job title. Make sure to convey the kind of employer you work for, the scope of your job, and range of responsibilities. Sometimes you will need to skip a space before you list your accomplishments, depending on how text heavy this paragraph is. Try to stick to 4-5 lines, with very short, compact sentences.
Under that paragraph, use bullets to list your accomplishments. I generally prefer 5 or 6 bullets, and never more than 7. With fewer bullets, people are far more able to focus in on what you believe is really important.
Skip one line between each job.
Skip two lines between each section.
Have a few commonly expected sections. First is EXPERIENCE, second is EDUCATION, and third is PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS. If applicable, fourth is AWARDS & RECOGNITION, fifth is PUBLICATIONS and sixth is PUBLIC SPEAKING & MEDIA APPEARANCES. Headings are always all caps and bold.
The only time EDUCATION is first is when you have just graduated from college or graduate school and are looking for your first professional job. I've run across two exceptions: one was for a professor who had to conform to a format established by the academic institution. The second was for a lawyer whose schooling was far more impressive than his work history, given the places to which he applied. Had he been out of school more than five years, however, no exception would have applied.
EXPERIENCE means all your work experience, paid and unpaid. Include everything, in order to have a complete time line. Skipping years in a chronology simply raises questions in a reviewer's mind. The only questions we want from a reviewer are those asking you to elaborate on something in your resume.
Some people have significant volunteer and/or non-profit experience. If you want to transition into working for a non-profit organization, I recommend inserting a VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCE or NON-PROFIT EXPERIENCE section between the EXPERIENCE and EDUCATION sections. Format it like you format your work experience, to convey the message that you take it as seriously as your paid work.
For AFFILIATIONS, AWARDS & RECOGNITION, PUBLICATIONS, and PUBLIC SPEAKING & MEDIA APPEARANCES, it's wise to add the word "selected" in parentheses after the headings. When in doubt, cut it out. It's better to list three or four really great items than induce a yawn with a minutiae-laden laundry list. The word (selected) should not be bold.
Use white space intelligently. Any reader needs a place to rest his or her eyes; that's what white space is for. White space is that space that contains no text. Something that is too text-heavy feels overwhelming to a reader and the tendency is to skim rather than read. Enough white space balances the text and helps the reader make it through your resume with ease.
White space is your friend in other ways. It allows you to highlight special things, as well, such as your name and your accomplishments. Your name should be on top, centered, in 16 point bold type. Your contact information goes below, spread wide apart toward either margin. Address, including e-mail address, goes to the far left, with telephone numbers to the far right. This creates tons of white space around your name, allowing it to stand out.
A special education teacher told me that readers of English and other Western languages naturally start reading about a third of the way down on the left side of a page. As we read, our eyes naturally go up to the top center of a page, and then fall back down on the right side. So a reader is definitely going to notice your name in the top center position. This positioning also makes it very easy for people to find your resume in a pile.
Aim for a two-page resume. My posts on May 28 and 29, 2008 address the reasons for this.
Next post: Content.
Rocking resumes have two essential components: content and format. Both are vital to an applicant's chances of getting an interview. This section deals with format.
Resume Format
You can have the greatest content in the world and still not get interviewed - if you have a bad resume format. The resume format I use is very effective because it's simple, direct, easily sent electronically, and logical to read. It showcases all the wonderful aspects of your experience.
Use an ordinary font, one that comes standard on Word software. My favorite to use is Garamond, sometimes referred to as the "more elegant version" of Times Roman. Serif typefaces, like Times Roman or Garamond, are normally easier for people to read, as well as very familiar and sort of expected. For Times Roman, use at least size 11 font; Garamond is smaller, so size 12 is better. If you really want to use a sans serif typeface, go with one that is elegant while commonplace. While many people use Arial, I think it's boring because of its ubiquity. Tahoma and Verdana are good alternatives, and Trebuchet MS is my favorite because its spacing makes for an easy read. For these typefaces, use at least a size 11 and preferably a size 12 font for Arial and Trebuchet.
One woman I knew sent me her resume for review. A previous version used a very fancy but totally undecipherable type face, so I was quite pleased (though surprised) when the next version used Times Roman. I made comments, sent it back, and was very surprised when she asked me why I changed her type face. Apparently, the type face she chose was so uncommon that Word simply switched to the default typeface. That's why I'm so cautious about formatting, because it can often get garbled.
Avoid fancy formatting, including any lines, text boxes, macros and offbeat tabs. The goal is to make it easy for the reader to read EXACTLY what you want them to read. Fancy formatting often gets garbled, such as bullets on your screen turning into question marks on someone else's. The last thing anyone should see is a question mark before one of your accomplishments. While they may understand that it's a formatting error, it is likely to raise a question about your competence, even subliminally.
It's best to avoid lines for the simple reason that a prospective employer needs to see you as a whole package, not as separate pieces. Lines are visual cues to compartmentalize things, separate you from your accomplishments, skip something or cut something out. You've probably put in a line because you want to look like you understand design or want to stand out. If you're really a designer, you understand that lines are usually intended to create clear distinctions between things. For example, a box within a larger article generally is for a complementary yet unnecessary piece of information - or for an ad, or some other extraneous item. NOTHING in your resume is unnecessary, so keep it visually one whole document, all of which is vital.
Be consistent and predictable throughout your resume. Use a single typeface. Use the same format for each job experience. Skip the same number of lines between jobs and sections. Whatever you decide, stick to it. Otherwise it comes across as sloppy - not creative.
Put your employer's name first, followed by the city and then the date on the same line. Bold the employer's name, but not the city or the date. Tab over for the date. On the next line, put your job title in bold and italics.
Line up your dates on the right side of the page. All should be aligned with each other, and all should have the same format. It's up to you whether you use 10/02-10/04 or October 2002-October 2004. I prefer the former simply because it takes up less space and leaves a fair amount of white space between the name of the employer and the dates worked.
Describe your basic responsibilities in a short paragraph immediately under your job title. Make sure to convey the kind of employer you work for, the scope of your job, and range of responsibilities. Sometimes you will need to skip a space before you list your accomplishments, depending on how text heavy this paragraph is. Try to stick to 4-5 lines, with very short, compact sentences.
Under that paragraph, use bullets to list your accomplishments. I generally prefer 5 or 6 bullets, and never more than 7. With fewer bullets, people are far more able to focus in on what you believe is really important.
Skip one line between each job.
Skip two lines between each section.
Have a few commonly expected sections. First is EXPERIENCE, second is EDUCATION, and third is PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS. If applicable, fourth is AWARDS & RECOGNITION, fifth is PUBLICATIONS and sixth is PUBLIC SPEAKING & MEDIA APPEARANCES. Headings are always all caps and bold.
The only time EDUCATION is first is when you have just graduated from college or graduate school and are looking for your first professional job. I've run across two exceptions: one was for a professor who had to conform to a format established by the academic institution. The second was for a lawyer whose schooling was far more impressive than his work history, given the places to which he applied. Had he been out of school more than five years, however, no exception would have applied.
EXPERIENCE means all your work experience, paid and unpaid. Include everything, in order to have a complete time line. Skipping years in a chronology simply raises questions in a reviewer's mind. The only questions we want from a reviewer are those asking you to elaborate on something in your resume.
Some people have significant volunteer and/or non-profit experience. If you want to transition into working for a non-profit organization, I recommend inserting a VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCE or NON-PROFIT EXPERIENCE section between the EXPERIENCE and EDUCATION sections. Format it like you format your work experience, to convey the message that you take it as seriously as your paid work.
For AFFILIATIONS, AWARDS & RECOGNITION, PUBLICATIONS, and PUBLIC SPEAKING & MEDIA APPEARANCES, it's wise to add the word "selected" in parentheses after the headings. When in doubt, cut it out. It's better to list three or four really great items than induce a yawn with a minutiae-laden laundry list. The word (selected) should not be bold.
Use white space intelligently. Any reader needs a place to rest his or her eyes; that's what white space is for. White space is that space that contains no text. Something that is too text-heavy feels overwhelming to a reader and the tendency is to skim rather than read. Enough white space balances the text and helps the reader make it through your resume with ease.
White space is your friend in other ways. It allows you to highlight special things, as well, such as your name and your accomplishments. Your name should be on top, centered, in 16 point bold type. Your contact information goes below, spread wide apart toward either margin. Address, including e-mail address, goes to the far left, with telephone numbers to the far right. This creates tons of white space around your name, allowing it to stand out.
A special education teacher told me that readers of English and other Western languages naturally start reading about a third of the way down on the left side of a page. As we read, our eyes naturally go up to the top center of a page, and then fall back down on the right side. So a reader is definitely going to notice your name in the top center position. This positioning also makes it very easy for people to find your resume in a pile.
Aim for a two-page resume. My posts on May 28 and 29, 2008 address the reasons for this.
Next post: Content.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Non-Profit Board Governance: The Elephant in the Room
Last week, I answered this question on LinkedIn posed by Frank G. Scarpaci of Project Designworks, a boutique management consulting firm headquartered in San Diego, CA.
What are the top three obstacles to effective nonprofit board governance?
My answer:
1. Board micromanagement because they don't trust management and perhaps they don't really understand how to manage and delegate.
2. Board members not understanding how non-profits operate and what their role is vis a vis management. Too often, Board members from the for-profit field believe they are smarter and more capable than the non-profit staff.
3. Chief Executives not being viewed as co-owners of the non-profit and respected as much as for-profit CEOs are respected. Non-profit CEO's are too often viewed as the "hired help."
My first two sentiments were echoed by most of the other 13 responses (see them at www.linkedin.com/answers/non-profit .
Lack of clear roles and expectations seems to be the primary obstacle to effective non-profit Board governance. This makes sense, given the history of non-profits - or charities as they were known originally. We basically are dealing with an anachronistic governance model that is based on condescension both to charity beneficiaries and charity staff.
When charitable institutions began in the mid-19th century, they were an evolution from volunteer efforts by wealthy men and sometimes women. In New York City, the first charity organization was the Association for the Improvement of the Condition of the Poor. Begun by a group of wealthy businessmen, the AICP grew out of "friendly visits" to poor families to identify and then ameliorate some of their problems as well as preach to them about the error of their ways. When these men realized they could no longer sustain their level of involvement, they began to hire women to carry out the visits, and they took on the role of Board of Governors. The role of that Board was to direct the daily work of the hired help. And being on this and other charitable Boards was very much like belonging to an exclusive club of insiders - socially desirable and prestigious, while not accountable to any larger group of stakeholders.
Other charities began with similar motives and assumptions about the role of the Board. Boards ran everything, and did not assume that their staff were professionals. It was only in the mid to late 20th century that charities became known as non-profits, and that staff were hired on the basis of their skills and expertise. While there were many causes for this - not least of which were emerging social issues that demanded attention and care - I believe Board members became increasingly unable to devote time to charitable work and the management of staff. It was necessary and easier to hire staff to which they could delegate the management of daily operations. Obviously, the Board members gave money to pay staff (as little as possible...) and to endow many organizations.
For example, the AICP evolved into the Community Service Society of NY which continues to this day funded in part by a multi-million dollar endowment. CSS has a refreshed mission - Fighting Poverty, Strengthening New York - and a highly skilled CEO (David R. Jones) and professional staff.
(For a great history of non-profit governance, see www.boardsource.org.)
In 1964, the American Bar Association drafted the Model Nonstock Corporation Statute, that changed the standards by which non-profit Boards operated to be similar to that of for-profit corporations. Boardsource says: "Nonprofits could do anything for-profits could do — except distribute their surpluses in the form of dividends." I'm sure this contributed to the growth of the idea that nonprofit organizations should be "run like a business." After all, if they are governed as corporations are, then shouldn't their management match their governance?
As non-profits proliferated and grew more complicated, they required more skilled managers. And professional managers disliked what they viewed as interference by Board members who could not possibly know much more than the surface facts about the organization's work.
This continues today, as non-profits grapple with society's most intractable and important issues, like hunger relief, housing, health care, education, violence prevention, youth development, child care, and more. Legal, ethical and practical concerns and mandates make the top management's work complex. Board members, who spend at most 10-20% of their time on charitable purposes, cannot hope to even begin to grasp the challenges and conundrums faced by management every minute of every day. Small wonder that executive leadership resents Board members who second-guess and question managerial decisions.
Further complicating matters is the radical cutback in government funding for many non-profits since the early 1980's. All of a sudden, non-profits had to get much better at raising money and delivering services, sometimes for a fee. And the primary role of Board members unofficially changed from overseeing management to raising money.
Yet the governance structure of CSS and every other non-profit remains basically untouched. Any Board member - regardless of his or her contribution level - gets an equal say in questioning management. No Board member is required by law to be a member of, knowledgeable about or accountable to the constituency served. Board members resist raising money until they are practically forced to give, get, or get off - usually by staff with reluctant support from the Board leadership. Giving and raising money How Board members are selected is usually a matter of who volunteers, who knows whom, and who has the most clout and access to resources.
The current governance system essentially requires nothing of Board members other than their willingness to show up at some meetings. Yet somehow this group of people is invested with amazing responsibility and power - both far greater than that possessed by paid staff. In fact, the Internal Revenue Service recommends an active Board of Directors:
The Internal Revenue Service encourages an active and engaged board believing that it is important to the success of a charity and to its compliance with applicable tax law requirements. Governing boards should be composed of persons who are informed and active in overseeing a charity’s operations and finances. If a governing board tolerates a climate of secrecy or neglect, we are concerned that charitable assets are more likely to be diverted to benefit the private interests of insiders at the expense of public and charitable interests. Successful governing boards include individuals who not only are knowledgeable and engaged, but selected with the organization’s needs in mind (e.g. accounting, finance, compensation, and ethics)... Organizations that file Form 990 will find that Part VI, Section A, Lines 1, 2 ,3, and 7 ask questions about the governing body.
Unfortunately, there is no oversight of non-profit Boards to ensure that this standard is met. The IRS does no monitoring except of whether an organization pays its payroll taxes and files its 990. Only non-payment of taxes gets an organization in trouble, though - and Boards are not held responsible while paid staff are. States' Attorneys General have legal oversight of non-profit fundraising but not of their Boards. Secretaries of State (or similar officials) approve incorporation, including checking to make sure there are the requisite minimum three incorporating Board members. But those Board members can be anyone over age 18. After incorporation, no one checks on anything.
There have been numerous scandals involving misuse of funds by paid executives of non-profit organizations. When those arise, other Boards of Directors tend to go into panic mode and increase the second-guessing and micro-management, as if this will help protect them from such embarrassment. For that really is the only consequence for Board members - embarrassment that they didn't have adequate oversight systems in place. Directors & Officers insurance protects Board members from most personal liability for any financial damage. There are no shareholders to vote Board members out of office. Consequences only come when other civic leaders and elected officials step in and demand that Boards resign and/or remake themselves. But no one can force these Boards to do that. If they refuse, there is no recourse. The only real punishment that can happen is for donors to pull out their funding or cease making contributions. I suppose there's a lot of good to a "market-based solution" yet somehow there's something wrong about so much money being entrusted to such unqualified people who have zero accountability.
John Carver developed a very interesting governance system, the Carver Policy Governance Model. I sat on the America's Second Harvest Board when it adopted that model. And in so many ways, it is a great model. Here's a description from the Carvergovernance.com website.
Policy Governance® is an integrated set of concepts and principles that describes the job of any governing board. It outlines the manner in which boards can be successful in their servant-leadership role, as well as in their all-important relationship with management. Unlike most solutions to the challenge of board leadership, its approach to the design of the governance role is neither structural nor piecemeal, but is comprehensively theory based. The model covers all legitimate intentions of corporate governance codes (including Sarbanes-Oxley), but in a far more comprehensive, theory-based manner.
In contrast to the approaches typically used by boards, Policy Governance separates issues of organizational purpose (ENDS) from all other organizational issues (MEANS), placing primary importance on those Ends. Policy Governance boards demand accomplishment of purpose, and only limit the staff's available means to those which do not violate the board's pre-stated standards of prudence and ethics.
Researchers Barbara E. Taylor, Richard P. Chait & Thomas P. Holland wrote in the September/October 1996 Harvard Business Review (“The New Work of the Nonprofit Board,” p 36):
“Too often, the board of a nonprofit organization is little more than a collection of high-powered people engaged in low-level activities. But that can change, the authors say, if trustees are willing to discover and take on the new work of the board. When they perform the new work, a board’s members can significantly advance the institution’s mission and long-term welfare. Doing the new work requires a board to engage in new practices. First, the board must go beyond rubber-stamping management’s proposals and find out what issues really matter to the institution.”
Taylor and colleagues characterise this “new work” as requiring finding out what matters which means board and management together determining the issues and the agenda, making the CEO deal with big ideas, having the board understand who the important stakeholders are and developing relationships with them, consulting many sources of knowledge and information, board and management together deciding what should and can be measured and what can’t and needn’t be and above all organising around and acting on what matters and not on what doesn’t! They also observe that many boards are too prone to focus on others for resisting change when they themselves are no different. Correctly they assert that entrepreneurs and industrial captains are seldom effective because they are unused to working with others cooperatively.
As the non-profit sector continues to grow, it is attracting more and more people who want to "make a difference." Many start on Boards and end up as staff. All of them say the same thing: "I never knew what a pain in the *** a Board could be! I apologize for all I did to staff." I wonder if there ever will be a non-profit governance structure that makes sense for all involved and affected parties.
PS Des Griffin from Australia has some interesting things to say about museum governance.
What are the top three obstacles to effective nonprofit board governance?
My answer:
1. Board micromanagement because they don't trust management and perhaps they don't really understand how to manage and delegate.
2. Board members not understanding how non-profits operate and what their role is vis a vis management. Too often, Board members from the for-profit field believe they are smarter and more capable than the non-profit staff.
3. Chief Executives not being viewed as co-owners of the non-profit and respected as much as for-profit CEOs are respected. Non-profit CEO's are too often viewed as the "hired help."
My first two sentiments were echoed by most of the other 13 responses (see them at www.linkedin.com/answers/non-profit .
Lack of clear roles and expectations seems to be the primary obstacle to effective non-profit Board governance. This makes sense, given the history of non-profits - or charities as they were known originally. We basically are dealing with an anachronistic governance model that is based on condescension both to charity beneficiaries and charity staff.
When charitable institutions began in the mid-19th century, they were an evolution from volunteer efforts by wealthy men and sometimes women. In New York City, the first charity organization was the Association for the Improvement of the Condition of the Poor. Begun by a group of wealthy businessmen, the AICP grew out of "friendly visits" to poor families to identify and then ameliorate some of their problems as well as preach to them about the error of their ways. When these men realized they could no longer sustain their level of involvement, they began to hire women to carry out the visits, and they took on the role of Board of Governors. The role of that Board was to direct the daily work of the hired help. And being on this and other charitable Boards was very much like belonging to an exclusive club of insiders - socially desirable and prestigious, while not accountable to any larger group of stakeholders.
Other charities began with similar motives and assumptions about the role of the Board. Boards ran everything, and did not assume that their staff were professionals. It was only in the mid to late 20th century that charities became known as non-profits, and that staff were hired on the basis of their skills and expertise. While there were many causes for this - not least of which were emerging social issues that demanded attention and care - I believe Board members became increasingly unable to devote time to charitable work and the management of staff. It was necessary and easier to hire staff to which they could delegate the management of daily operations. Obviously, the Board members gave money to pay staff (as little as possible...) and to endow many organizations.
For example, the AICP evolved into the Community Service Society of NY which continues to this day funded in part by a multi-million dollar endowment. CSS has a refreshed mission - Fighting Poverty, Strengthening New York - and a highly skilled CEO (David R. Jones) and professional staff.
(For a great history of non-profit governance, see www.boardsource.org.)
In 1964, the American Bar Association drafted the Model Nonstock Corporation Statute, that changed the standards by which non-profit Boards operated to be similar to that of for-profit corporations. Boardsource says: "Nonprofits could do anything for-profits could do — except distribute their surpluses in the form of dividends." I'm sure this contributed to the growth of the idea that nonprofit organizations should be "run like a business." After all, if they are governed as corporations are, then shouldn't their management match their governance?
As non-profits proliferated and grew more complicated, they required more skilled managers. And professional managers disliked what they viewed as interference by Board members who could not possibly know much more than the surface facts about the organization's work.
This continues today, as non-profits grapple with society's most intractable and important issues, like hunger relief, housing, health care, education, violence prevention, youth development, child care, and more. Legal, ethical and practical concerns and mandates make the top management's work complex. Board members, who spend at most 10-20% of their time on charitable purposes, cannot hope to even begin to grasp the challenges and conundrums faced by management every minute of every day. Small wonder that executive leadership resents Board members who second-guess and question managerial decisions.
Further complicating matters is the radical cutback in government funding for many non-profits since the early 1980's. All of a sudden, non-profits had to get much better at raising money and delivering services, sometimes for a fee. And the primary role of Board members unofficially changed from overseeing management to raising money.
Yet the governance structure of CSS and every other non-profit remains basically untouched. Any Board member - regardless of his or her contribution level - gets an equal say in questioning management. No Board member is required by law to be a member of, knowledgeable about or accountable to the constituency served. Board members resist raising money until they are practically forced to give, get, or get off - usually by staff with reluctant support from the Board leadership. Giving and raising money How Board members are selected is usually a matter of who volunteers, who knows whom, and who has the most clout and access to resources.
The current governance system essentially requires nothing of Board members other than their willingness to show up at some meetings. Yet somehow this group of people is invested with amazing responsibility and power - both far greater than that possessed by paid staff. In fact, the Internal Revenue Service recommends an active Board of Directors:
The Internal Revenue Service encourages an active and engaged board believing that it is important to the success of a charity and to its compliance with applicable tax law requirements. Governing boards should be composed of persons who are informed and active in overseeing a charity’s operations and finances. If a governing board tolerates a climate of secrecy or neglect, we are concerned that charitable assets are more likely to be diverted to benefit the private interests of insiders at the expense of public and charitable interests. Successful governing boards include individuals who not only are knowledgeable and engaged, but selected with the organization’s needs in mind (e.g. accounting, finance, compensation, and ethics)... Organizations that file Form 990 will find that Part VI, Section A, Lines 1, 2 ,3, and 7 ask questions about the governing body.
Unfortunately, there is no oversight of non-profit Boards to ensure that this standard is met. The IRS does no monitoring except of whether an organization pays its payroll taxes and files its 990. Only non-payment of taxes gets an organization in trouble, though - and Boards are not held responsible while paid staff are. States' Attorneys General have legal oversight of non-profit fundraising but not of their Boards. Secretaries of State (or similar officials) approve incorporation, including checking to make sure there are the requisite minimum three incorporating Board members. But those Board members can be anyone over age 18. After incorporation, no one checks on anything.
There have been numerous scandals involving misuse of funds by paid executives of non-profit organizations. When those arise, other Boards of Directors tend to go into panic mode and increase the second-guessing and micro-management, as if this will help protect them from such embarrassment. For that really is the only consequence for Board members - embarrassment that they didn't have adequate oversight systems in place. Directors & Officers insurance protects Board members from most personal liability for any financial damage. There are no shareholders to vote Board members out of office. Consequences only come when other civic leaders and elected officials step in and demand that Boards resign and/or remake themselves. But no one can force these Boards to do that. If they refuse, there is no recourse. The only real punishment that can happen is for donors to pull out their funding or cease making contributions. I suppose there's a lot of good to a "market-based solution" yet somehow there's something wrong about so much money being entrusted to such unqualified people who have zero accountability.
John Carver developed a very interesting governance system, the Carver Policy Governance Model. I sat on the America's Second Harvest Board when it adopted that model. And in so many ways, it is a great model. Here's a description from the Carvergovernance.com website.
Policy Governance® is an integrated set of concepts and principles that describes the job of any governing board. It outlines the manner in which boards can be successful in their servant-leadership role, as well as in their all-important relationship with management. Unlike most solutions to the challenge of board leadership, its approach to the design of the governance role is neither structural nor piecemeal, but is comprehensively theory based. The model covers all legitimate intentions of corporate governance codes (including Sarbanes-Oxley), but in a far more comprehensive, theory-based manner.
In contrast to the approaches typically used by boards, Policy Governance separates issues of organizational purpose (ENDS) from all other organizational issues (MEANS), placing primary importance on those Ends. Policy Governance boards demand accomplishment of purpose, and only limit the staff's available means to those which do not violate the board's pre-stated standards of prudence and ethics.
Researchers Barbara E. Taylor, Richard P. Chait & Thomas P. Holland wrote in the September/October 1996 Harvard Business Review (“The New Work of the Nonprofit Board,” p 36):
“Too often, the board of a nonprofit organization is little more than a collection of high-powered people engaged in low-level activities. But that can change, the authors say, if trustees are willing to discover and take on the new work of the board. When they perform the new work, a board’s members can significantly advance the institution’s mission and long-term welfare. Doing the new work requires a board to engage in new practices. First, the board must go beyond rubber-stamping management’s proposals and find out what issues really matter to the institution.”
Taylor and colleagues characterise this “new work” as requiring finding out what matters which means board and management together determining the issues and the agenda, making the CEO deal with big ideas, having the board understand who the important stakeholders are and developing relationships with them, consulting many sources of knowledge and information, board and management together deciding what should and can be measured and what can’t and needn’t be and above all organising around and acting on what matters and not on what doesn’t! They also observe that many boards are too prone to focus on others for resisting change when they themselves are no different. Correctly they assert that entrepreneurs and industrial captains are seldom effective because they are unused to working with others cooperatively.
As the non-profit sector continues to grow, it is attracting more and more people who want to "make a difference." Many start on Boards and end up as staff. All of them say the same thing: "I never knew what a pain in the *** a Board could be! I apologize for all I did to staff." I wonder if there ever will be a non-profit governance structure that makes sense for all involved and affected parties.
PS Des Griffin from Australia has some interesting things to say about museum governance.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Networking or Information-Gathering?
Many people are very uncomfortable with "networking." I know this from two sources: the number of people who are peddling seminars and webinars and books to help others learn how to network effectively; and people in TransitionWorks who resist that step of the job search process.
Here's how I have approached the topic of networking.
The word "networking" can seem very big and overwhelming. On the other hand, talking to one person is specific and perhaps not as frightening. Dial it back to a place where you’re comfortable and not overwhelmed. Articulating specific next steps helps make it not overwhelming.
It helps me to think through exactly what might make me reluctant. Often it's fear. For me, fear can stem from attaching a lot of importance to the activity, and making the stakes REALLY high. So if I think that "networking" is going to lead either to my realizing my dreams or dashing my hopes - well, those are very high stakes and why on earth would I want to risk so much? Instead, I can think in smaller terms.
I like to think of specific tasks, next steps or people with whom I want to connect, instead of thinking about "NETWORKING." All I'm doing is finding out more about the field and work in which I'm interested. I'm simply connecting with a friend or former colleague or friend of a friend. I am taking an action that hopefully will have a small result - meaning I have an interesting conversation and possibly get the name and contact information for one more person with whom I can speak. The result isn't getting or not getting my dream job. That comes later, and the steps leading to that will all fall into place and make sense as they unfold. In other words, "take the action and let go of the result."
Perhaps I'll find, like one friend, that I'm uncomfortable making "cold calls" to people for the purposes of networking. In that case, let me see if I can find someone to make an introduction for me either in person or via e-mail. This one friend put it in these terms: "I need a warm introduction."
The same person also didn't know what she would say to people. Why on earth am I contacting them? I don't know if I want a job right now. HELP! She realized that all she has to say is "I'm thinking about changing jobs, and wanted to learn more about what you do. Would it be possible for us to have lunch or meet?" There's no commitment on her part, she's not asking for a job and putting the other person on the spot, and it's a very reasonable request that is easily accommodated.
We realized, too, that for her, networking implies that she is doing something for herself and is putting herself out into the world, perhaps exposing herself to an uncomfortable extent. I suggested that she think about the process as information-gathering, not networking. She liked that and said:
Networking is about putting yourself out there while information-gathering is about pulling information into you.
It satisfies her need for the meeting to be more about the other person and less about her and her needs. "Gathering information" is a format that lends itself to interviewing someone, asking questions to find out about the other person. Preparing a set of questions is helpful if you're not comfortable winging it. Most people will be happy to talk about themselves.
(I did caution my friend that she might have to ask women more than one question. for whatever reason, women often are much more aware of how much space and time we take up. Just think about how some men sit on the NYC subway - legs wide apart, taking up as much space as they want or think they need. I don't think I've seen more than two or three women do that in the 26 years I've ridden the NYC subways. In the same way, most women may need a prompting question or two to continue describing their experience - and take up the time and space they deserve.)
Here's how I have approached the topic of networking.
The word "networking" can seem very big and overwhelming. On the other hand, talking to one person is specific and perhaps not as frightening. Dial it back to a place where you’re comfortable and not overwhelmed. Articulating specific next steps helps make it not overwhelming.
It helps me to think through exactly what might make me reluctant. Often it's fear. For me, fear can stem from attaching a lot of importance to the activity, and making the stakes REALLY high. So if I think that "networking" is going to lead either to my realizing my dreams or dashing my hopes - well, those are very high stakes and why on earth would I want to risk so much? Instead, I can think in smaller terms.
I like to think of specific tasks, next steps or people with whom I want to connect, instead of thinking about "NETWORKING." All I'm doing is finding out more about the field and work in which I'm interested. I'm simply connecting with a friend or former colleague or friend of a friend. I am taking an action that hopefully will have a small result - meaning I have an interesting conversation and possibly get the name and contact information for one more person with whom I can speak. The result isn't getting or not getting my dream job. That comes later, and the steps leading to that will all fall into place and make sense as they unfold. In other words, "take the action and let go of the result."
Perhaps I'll find, like one friend, that I'm uncomfortable making "cold calls" to people for the purposes of networking. In that case, let me see if I can find someone to make an introduction for me either in person or via e-mail. This one friend put it in these terms: "I need a warm introduction."
The same person also didn't know what she would say to people. Why on earth am I contacting them? I don't know if I want a job right now. HELP! She realized that all she has to say is "I'm thinking about changing jobs, and wanted to learn more about what you do. Would it be possible for us to have lunch or meet?" There's no commitment on her part, she's not asking for a job and putting the other person on the spot, and it's a very reasonable request that is easily accommodated.
We realized, too, that for her, networking implies that she is doing something for herself and is putting herself out into the world, perhaps exposing herself to an uncomfortable extent. I suggested that she think about the process as information-gathering, not networking. She liked that and said:
Networking is about putting yourself out there while information-gathering is about pulling information into you.
It satisfies her need for the meeting to be more about the other person and less about her and her needs. "Gathering information" is a format that lends itself to interviewing someone, asking questions to find out about the other person. Preparing a set of questions is helpful if you're not comfortable winging it. Most people will be happy to talk about themselves.
(I did caution my friend that she might have to ask women more than one question. for whatever reason, women often are much more aware of how much space and time we take up. Just think about how some men sit on the NYC subway - legs wide apart, taking up as much space as they want or think they need. I don't think I've seen more than two or three women do that in the 26 years I've ridden the NYC subways. In the same way, most women may need a prompting question or two to continue describing their experience - and take up the time and space they deserve.)
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Clothes and Changing Jobs
Having a dispiriting job is difficult - I often would say "here I am having to be on my best game at the very time I feel so depressed and worthless." That's where "acting as if" comes in. If I change a single thing about my attitude or behavior, there can be ripple effects into the rest of my life. At very least, I'll get new information to notice.
One of the things I've noticed is that dressing well is an essential part of "acting as if" and "envisioning the desired end state" - the way to get to our intention and goal.
There's an expression: "I build self-esteem by doing "esteemable" things." For example, I started years ago making my bed in the morning, as an estimable thing to do. When I walked into my bedroom at night, it looked neat and ready for a new night's sleep. When I didn't make my bed, I felt a little lazy and disappointed in myself, and then at night it felt like I'd never left, as though I missed an entire day. I found myself saying "oh, I don't care" in order to help myself feel OK about not doing that simple thing. And the "I don't care" attitude then got permission to permeate my life. Whereas when I did make the bed, I demonstrated to myself that I DO care, and then that got permission to permeate my life. I do care about how I look, I do care about the work I do, I do care about where I live, I do care about my quality of life and my emotional health and physical health.
After turning 30, I gained a lot of weight and started wearing boring, boxy, neutral clothes in an effort to disappear. Of course, I never did disappear. Unfortunately, I communicated that wish to disappear to the rest of the world and to my psyche. The underlying message? I was ashamed of myself. I didn't care about myself. Other people picked up on my lack of self-esteem. While I'm not certain how that translated into how people treated me, I did sense disrespect and disregard.
Then I started dressing better - nicer quality clothes, more flattering styles, bolder colors, fun shoes, jewelry. I began to feel better about myself, more worthy, more capable, more respected. And about 9 months after I made that shift, I got the job as Executive Director of City Harvest. Plus I'd lost some weight.
I find that when I dress well, I often start to lose weight. And even if I don't, I still look good. I cease being ashamed of myself and no longer want to hide out - simply because I am demonstrating to myself (and the world, against which opinion I still do judge myself) that I care about myself and how I look. I am acknowledging that I am NOT invisible, much as I might pretend I am.
What's key about clothes is that they are something we really can do something about right now, even if we don't have the body or job or house or commute or partner we want. It's totally within our control, right now. So I find it a powerful tool for acting as if I matter, as if I'm worth more than my negative voices tell me I am worth.
That means I don't necessarily have to believe I'm worth it, I just have to act as if I believe it. New action can lead to changed beliefs. If I act (read: dress) as if I'm confident, I may start believing I am. (It's often summarized as "dress for success" - I just get there from the long way around.)
Small changes in what one wears can produce big changes in what one thinks of herself. My sister, for example, never wore jewelry. Through an at-home jewelry party, she bought some. Now she has a bunch of necklaces and earrings, and feels so polished and professional when she wears them. I see a different confidence, a feeling that she's special somehow. Just yesterday, I told her how nice she looked and wondered if she was going somewhere. She wasn't and she didn't feel dressed up, but she was wearing a necklace and it just transformed her appearance. It was an example of how a single change in behavior and dress can completely change how people perceive one as well as one's self-perception.
So go for it! Buy something a little scary to wear - a blue top in one of those teal, turquoise or pool shades. A deep coral skirt or pair of pants. A chunky necklace (if you wear jewelry - and if you don't and you're not constitutionally uncomfortable with it, start wearing some!) or noticeable pair of earrings. Or a long, bright scarf draped around your neck. Some bright shoes - green or deep pink. A scoop or deep V neckline. Even a sheath dress in black or navy with a great necklace. It doesn't matter what your style is, as long as you step a little out of your comfort zone.
Oh, and when people compliment you, just smile and say "thank you!" Eventually, you will be comfortable with the compliments - because your own self-esteem will have risen to match your estimable outward appearance.
One of the things I've noticed is that dressing well is an essential part of "acting as if" and "envisioning the desired end state" - the way to get to our intention and goal.
There's an expression: "I build self-esteem by doing "esteemable" things." For example, I started years ago making my bed in the morning, as an estimable thing to do. When I walked into my bedroom at night, it looked neat and ready for a new night's sleep. When I didn't make my bed, I felt a little lazy and disappointed in myself, and then at night it felt like I'd never left, as though I missed an entire day. I found myself saying "oh, I don't care" in order to help myself feel OK about not doing that simple thing. And the "I don't care" attitude then got permission to permeate my life. Whereas when I did make the bed, I demonstrated to myself that I DO care, and then that got permission to permeate my life. I do care about how I look, I do care about the work I do, I do care about where I live, I do care about my quality of life and my emotional health and physical health.
After turning 30, I gained a lot of weight and started wearing boring, boxy, neutral clothes in an effort to disappear. Of course, I never did disappear. Unfortunately, I communicated that wish to disappear to the rest of the world and to my psyche. The underlying message? I was ashamed of myself. I didn't care about myself. Other people picked up on my lack of self-esteem. While I'm not certain how that translated into how people treated me, I did sense disrespect and disregard.
Then I started dressing better - nicer quality clothes, more flattering styles, bolder colors, fun shoes, jewelry. I began to feel better about myself, more worthy, more capable, more respected. And about 9 months after I made that shift, I got the job as Executive Director of City Harvest. Plus I'd lost some weight.
I find that when I dress well, I often start to lose weight. And even if I don't, I still look good. I cease being ashamed of myself and no longer want to hide out - simply because I am demonstrating to myself (and the world, against which opinion I still do judge myself) that I care about myself and how I look. I am acknowledging that I am NOT invisible, much as I might pretend I am.
What's key about clothes is that they are something we really can do something about right now, even if we don't have the body or job or house or commute or partner we want. It's totally within our control, right now. So I find it a powerful tool for acting as if I matter, as if I'm worth more than my negative voices tell me I am worth.
That means I don't necessarily have to believe I'm worth it, I just have to act as if I believe it. New action can lead to changed beliefs. If I act (read: dress) as if I'm confident, I may start believing I am. (It's often summarized as "dress for success" - I just get there from the long way around.)
Small changes in what one wears can produce big changes in what one thinks of herself. My sister, for example, never wore jewelry. Through an at-home jewelry party, she bought some. Now she has a bunch of necklaces and earrings, and feels so polished and professional when she wears them. I see a different confidence, a feeling that she's special somehow. Just yesterday, I told her how nice she looked and wondered if she was going somewhere. She wasn't and she didn't feel dressed up, but she was wearing a necklace and it just transformed her appearance. It was an example of how a single change in behavior and dress can completely change how people perceive one as well as one's self-perception.
So go for it! Buy something a little scary to wear - a blue top in one of those teal, turquoise or pool shades. A deep coral skirt or pair of pants. A chunky necklace (if you wear jewelry - and if you don't and you're not constitutionally uncomfortable with it, start wearing some!) or noticeable pair of earrings. Or a long, bright scarf draped around your neck. Some bright shoes - green or deep pink. A scoop or deep V neckline. Even a sheath dress in black or navy with a great necklace. It doesn't matter what your style is, as long as you step a little out of your comfort zone.
Oh, and when people compliment you, just smile and say "thank you!" Eventually, you will be comfortable with the compliments - because your own self-esteem will have risen to match your estimable outward appearance.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Semantic Web
Among my eclectic interests is the semantic web. What, you may ask, is that? According to Project10X's (www.project10X.com ) Semantic Wave 2008 Report: Industry Roadmap to Web 3.0 & Multibillion Dollar Market Opportunities (February 2008), the semantic web is Web 3.0. They define it thus:
The next stage, Web 3.0, is starting now. It is about representing meanings, connecting knowledge, and putting these to work in ways that make our experience of internet more relevant, useful, and enjoyable....Over the next decade, Web 3.0 will spawn multi-billion dollar technology markets that will drive trillion dollar global economic expansions to transform industries as well as our experience of the internet....The basic shift occurring in Web 3.0 is from information-centric to knowledge-centric patterns of computing. Web 3.0 will enable people and machines to connect, evolve, share, and use knowledge on an unprecedented scale and in new ways that make our experience of the internet better....When knowledge is encoded in a semantic form, it becomes transparent and accessible at any time to a variety of reasoning engines.
My friend Eric Hoffer has a blog that discusses semantic technology as a tool to use in business and life (click on the headline to get to his site). One of the people he refers to is Dave McComb of Semantic Arts who gave an excellent introductory presentation at the recent Semantic Technology Conference on the west coast. He says that the possibilities of the semantic web are to:
1) augment existing information - combining anything we know with other things we know and deriving inferences based on what we know.
2) give us freedom from tyranny of traditional schema - allowing us to access information in a variety of ways.
3) provide a way to get past keywords as the approach to search, with all their limitations.
Honestly, I don't really understand all of this. However. I am convinced that this is the kind of technology that will help change the world. So I'm following it and linking up to people who are doing the same.
The next stage, Web 3.0, is starting now. It is about representing meanings, connecting knowledge, and putting these to work in ways that make our experience of internet more relevant, useful, and enjoyable....Over the next decade, Web 3.0 will spawn multi-billion dollar technology markets that will drive trillion dollar global economic expansions to transform industries as well as our experience of the internet....The basic shift occurring in Web 3.0 is from information-centric to knowledge-centric patterns of computing. Web 3.0 will enable people and machines to connect, evolve, share, and use knowledge on an unprecedented scale and in new ways that make our experience of the internet better....When knowledge is encoded in a semantic form, it becomes transparent and accessible at any time to a variety of reasoning engines.
My friend Eric Hoffer has a blog that discusses semantic technology as a tool to use in business and life (click on the headline to get to his site). One of the people he refers to is Dave McComb of Semantic Arts who gave an excellent introductory presentation at the recent Semantic Technology Conference on the west coast. He says that the possibilities of the semantic web are to:
1) augment existing information - combining anything we know with other things we know and deriving inferences based on what we know.
2) give us freedom from tyranny of traditional schema - allowing us to access information in a variety of ways.
3) provide a way to get past keywords as the approach to search, with all their limitations.
Honestly, I don't really understand all of this. However. I am convinced that this is the kind of technology that will help change the world. So I'm following it and linking up to people who are doing the same.
Sunday, June 8, 2008
Focusing on the Next Step
Today's New York Times covered Ana Ivanovic's French Open win yesterday. Last year, Ivanovic made it to the finals where she was soundly defeated by Justine Henin - and her own mental state. Her nerves undid her, as they did also this year in her Australian Open final loss to Maria Sharapova. She says:
I had a few sleepless nights after that, honestly. Part of me was already thinking about possibly holding the trophy, you know.
Then she talks about what was different for her at the French Open.
So this time, I really tried to change that and don't think about that at all and just focus on my game. There were some moments where this thought would still come up, but I managed to control it much better.
What a powerful statement of self-awareness and focus! it's a fantastic illustration of how critical it is for us to focus only on the next step in a process instead of on the result. When Ivanovic thought about the future, she was unable to be fully in the present, to keep her focus on the crucial step of playing her best game.
Fortunately for her, Ivanovic was capable of and willing to examine her losses and learn from them. Her example underscores the value of examining one's thoughts, actions and results to determine how they are all related. Ivanovic clearly identified the key thought that caused her problems, and then worked to quiet it. While she doesn't describe how she controlled her focus on holding the trophy, my guess is she refocused on being in the now and on the next action - her serve, her return, her strategy for the next shot, observing her opponent, and watching the ball's movement.
When I talk to people who hope to change jobs, I counsel them to focus on getting interviews rather than on getting a job. The interview is the next step in the process, after you identify your ideal job and crafts a resume that markets you to get such a job.
Getting the interview gives you a chance to see whether the job is actually a "right fit" for you. Too often, people dismiss a job at first glance because they don't like the job title, or they had a negative experience with a similar organization, or they assume the salary is too low - any number of reasons. However, if there was anything in the job that attracted them and nothing that specifically contradicts several of your "must have" list, I suggest that the person apply and see if s/he gets the interview. If nothing else, you can never have too many interviews. And what a great thing it is to be able to practice your interview skills for jobs you may not want or care about!
Ideally, the interview is the place to find out more about a particular job, to gather the information needed to see whether you want to continue pursuing the opportunity. Yes, the interviewers also are evaluating you and they may decide you aren't right for the job. In that case, be glad that you know now rather than continuing through a process even further. If the interviewers do want to see you again, also be glad for the chance to learn even more about the job and to further explore whether the job is a right fit.
In my experience, titles are usually negotiable, salary ranges often depend on the candidate's qualifications and can be stretched for the right person, and every organization is different with a different culture.
One person almost didn't apply for a job with an international organization because she had a disappointing experience with another one with a similar mission and name. The previous organization offered her less money than she needed and wanted, was inflexible on the title, and had a culture that was less than welcoming to her as an African-American woman.
Fortunately, she focused on simply getting an interview with the second organization. During the interview process, she got more and more excited by the position and the organization. Its culture was significantly different, its staff much more diverse, the title exactly what she wanted, and the money very close to her minimum needs. The job was a "right fit" for her, after all, and the organization felt the same about her.
When last I saw her for lunch, she was glowing. She loves her job, the people she works with, the organizational mission and culture, and her future possibilities.
She is a perfect example of how great results can happen when one focuses on the next step instead of on the possible outcome. It's incredibly powerful to stay in the now rather than dream about the future.
I had a few sleepless nights after that, honestly. Part of me was already thinking about possibly holding the trophy, you know.
Then she talks about what was different for her at the French Open.
So this time, I really tried to change that and don't think about that at all and just focus on my game. There were some moments where this thought would still come up, but I managed to control it much better.
What a powerful statement of self-awareness and focus! it's a fantastic illustration of how critical it is for us to focus only on the next step in a process instead of on the result. When Ivanovic thought about the future, she was unable to be fully in the present, to keep her focus on the crucial step of playing her best game.
Fortunately for her, Ivanovic was capable of and willing to examine her losses and learn from them. Her example underscores the value of examining one's thoughts, actions and results to determine how they are all related. Ivanovic clearly identified the key thought that caused her problems, and then worked to quiet it. While she doesn't describe how she controlled her focus on holding the trophy, my guess is she refocused on being in the now and on the next action - her serve, her return, her strategy for the next shot, observing her opponent, and watching the ball's movement.
When I talk to people who hope to change jobs, I counsel them to focus on getting interviews rather than on getting a job. The interview is the next step in the process, after you identify your ideal job and crafts a resume that markets you to get such a job.
Getting the interview gives you a chance to see whether the job is actually a "right fit" for you. Too often, people dismiss a job at first glance because they don't like the job title, or they had a negative experience with a similar organization, or they assume the salary is too low - any number of reasons. However, if there was anything in the job that attracted them and nothing that specifically contradicts several of your "must have" list, I suggest that the person apply and see if s/he gets the interview. If nothing else, you can never have too many interviews. And what a great thing it is to be able to practice your interview skills for jobs you may not want or care about!
Ideally, the interview is the place to find out more about a particular job, to gather the information needed to see whether you want to continue pursuing the opportunity. Yes, the interviewers also are evaluating you and they may decide you aren't right for the job. In that case, be glad that you know now rather than continuing through a process even further. If the interviewers do want to see you again, also be glad for the chance to learn even more about the job and to further explore whether the job is a right fit.
In my experience, titles are usually negotiable, salary ranges often depend on the candidate's qualifications and can be stretched for the right person, and every organization is different with a different culture.
One person almost didn't apply for a job with an international organization because she had a disappointing experience with another one with a similar mission and name. The previous organization offered her less money than she needed and wanted, was inflexible on the title, and had a culture that was less than welcoming to her as an African-American woman.
Fortunately, she focused on simply getting an interview with the second organization. During the interview process, she got more and more excited by the position and the organization. Its culture was significantly different, its staff much more diverse, the title exactly what she wanted, and the money very close to her minimum needs. The job was a "right fit" for her, after all, and the organization felt the same about her.
When last I saw her for lunch, she was glowing. She loves her job, the people she works with, the organizational mission and culture, and her future possibilities.
She is a perfect example of how great results can happen when one focuses on the next step instead of on the possible outcome. It's incredibly powerful to stay in the now rather than dream about the future.
Friday, June 6, 2008
Finding Staff Who Are a "Cultural Fit"
A fellow Maplewoodian posted a fascinating piece on how a new client of his works to find staff that are a cultural fit. Look at www.transitionworks.org for the essential questions they ask.
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Having a Conversation to Resolve Conflict
There are tools to use to have a good conversation with someone else – no matter how angry and seemingly intractable they appear. It’s all about really listening to the person – “active listening” is a key tool – and getting very clear about what happened and what could help resolve it now and in the future. By the end of the conversation, you and the other person optimally would be allies in solving the problem. It requires great patience and stretching beyond your comfort zone. And you can do it.
The key to resolving conflict is to do it with the people who are directly involved. E-mail is a no-no. In person, face-to-face conversation is the best method. Once you all have established relationships based on trust, phone conversations can be used. To build trust, you have to talk to people directly, in person.
If all parties involved stop listening to each other and refuse to accommodate one another, a no-win situation exists. This is a classic stand-off situation. Someone has to make the first move. Making the first move is difficult when one is “sensitive to conflict” – it’s very scary to approach someone who has expressed his/her anger or displeasure in some way. Yet that’s exactly what has to happen.
The Process
1. Approach the person to ask if they have some time to talk, either then or within a day. Remember, you’re asking them for something, not making a demand.
2. Thank them for making the time (whenever it is).
3. When you begin talking, start by summarizing what you believe is the immediate problem. For example, “I wanted to talk to you about the recent meeting. When I read your e-mail, I got it that you were upset at not being informed about it. I also read that you wish we had a better process for communicating these things.”
It’s critical that you use “I” statements. You have no idea what they mean, how they feel, what they intend. And if the person is angry, s/he will really get angry if you try to tell them what they meant. So instead of saying “You were really upset about that” you can say “It seemed to me that the situation upset you.” This phrasing depersonalizes it for the other person and allows them to validate your perception or not.
4. Immediately follow this statement with a question to check out the validity of your perception. “Have I understood your concerns?”
5. Allow the person their response:
Anger - “NO! you don’t understand” – you can say “I want to understand. Can you explain it to me again?” When they’ve expressed it again, say “I hear you saying…xyz. Is that what you mean?” Your goal is to get them to agree that you have understood what they are saying.
Acceptance – “Yes, that’s it.” – you say, “Great. I’m glad I understand.”
Correction – “you’ve got part of it, but not all of it” – you can say “What haven’t I understood?”
When they say the clarification, repeat it after them saying “This is what I hear you saying…abc. Is that right?”
6. Whatever the response, you want to get to the point where you understand the other person’s issue to that other person’s satisfaction. Repeating back to them what they’ve said is the key to “active listening” – it’s also known as “mirroring.”
7. Once you both are on the same page, you can say “I’m sorry this happened. And I wonder if there is something I can do now to rectify the situation – if not this one, then in the future.” You’re hoping to learn from them what they need. You can even ask directly “what do you need from me in the future in a similar situation?”
8. Again, allow them their response. Usually by this time, the person isn’t as angry. If s/he still is angry, the chances are s/he won’t want to “fix you” or “tell you how to make it better.” If that’s the case, your next step is to suggest something you could have done. For example, “would it have helped if I sent out a notice to the senior management group after my initial conversation?”
9. If the person isn’t angry and does answer your question, use the “mirroring” technique again to clarify.
10. When you think you both understand what the solution is, summarize it. “So here’s what I think we agreed: xxx. Did I get it all?” Somehow, check it out with the other person.
11. You then make a commitment to the person. “OK, I commit to letting you know well in advance of anything that is likely to need the male health educators. And I also commit to talking it over with you to make sure I get your ideas and that the timing works with your health education schedule. How does that sound?” Get the other person’s to agree your commitment will meet his/her needs.
If you can’t make that commitment, make another one. Say clearly, “I will try to talk to you individually but it might not always be possible. However, I will definitely bring it up at a senior management meeting and get your input there.” Again, get the other person’s agreement.
12. Hopefully, by this time, you can then make a suggestion about a process or system that could be applied across the group. For example, “Do you think it would be useful to talk about this situation with the others in the senior management group, so we can all figure out how to communicate better with each other?”
If the other person agrees, you two can work together to draft a short agenda item and send it to Lorraine to get her to put it on the group meeting agenda. (All group members have the ability to put items on the agenda, I believe. Optimally, those agendas will be distributed before the meeting so people have a chance to think about the various topics. It will make the meetings more efficient.)
Remember:
• Pay no attention to their body language. Pay attention to your own. Sit with feet on floor and hands on table. Avoid crossing arms and legs. Look the person in the eye.
• Bring a piece of paper and a pen in case you are moved to write something down. It helps the other person feel heard.
• Focus on what the other person is saying. Avoid thinking about your response. Avoid defensiveness. Avoid accusation. Focus on solving the problem.
• Keep your focus on the goal – resolving conflict, building trust, and establishing forward movement for your relationship and possibly for the entire group.
The key to resolving conflict is to do it with the people who are directly involved. E-mail is a no-no. In person, face-to-face conversation is the best method. Once you all have established relationships based on trust, phone conversations can be used. To build trust, you have to talk to people directly, in person.
If all parties involved stop listening to each other and refuse to accommodate one another, a no-win situation exists. This is a classic stand-off situation. Someone has to make the first move. Making the first move is difficult when one is “sensitive to conflict” – it’s very scary to approach someone who has expressed his/her anger or displeasure in some way. Yet that’s exactly what has to happen.
The Process
1. Approach the person to ask if they have some time to talk, either then or within a day. Remember, you’re asking them for something, not making a demand.
2. Thank them for making the time (whenever it is).
3. When you begin talking, start by summarizing what you believe is the immediate problem. For example, “I wanted to talk to you about the recent meeting. When I read your e-mail, I got it that you were upset at not being informed about it. I also read that you wish we had a better process for communicating these things.”
It’s critical that you use “I” statements. You have no idea what they mean, how they feel, what they intend. And if the person is angry, s/he will really get angry if you try to tell them what they meant. So instead of saying “You were really upset about that” you can say “It seemed to me that the situation upset you.” This phrasing depersonalizes it for the other person and allows them to validate your perception or not.
4. Immediately follow this statement with a question to check out the validity of your perception. “Have I understood your concerns?”
5. Allow the person their response:
Anger - “NO! you don’t understand” – you can say “I want to understand. Can you explain it to me again?” When they’ve expressed it again, say “I hear you saying…xyz. Is that what you mean?” Your goal is to get them to agree that you have understood what they are saying.
Acceptance – “Yes, that’s it.” – you say, “Great. I’m glad I understand.”
Correction – “you’ve got part of it, but not all of it” – you can say “What haven’t I understood?”
When they say the clarification, repeat it after them saying “This is what I hear you saying…abc. Is that right?”
6. Whatever the response, you want to get to the point where you understand the other person’s issue to that other person’s satisfaction. Repeating back to them what they’ve said is the key to “active listening” – it’s also known as “mirroring.”
7. Once you both are on the same page, you can say “I’m sorry this happened. And I wonder if there is something I can do now to rectify the situation – if not this one, then in the future.” You’re hoping to learn from them what they need. You can even ask directly “what do you need from me in the future in a similar situation?”
8. Again, allow them their response. Usually by this time, the person isn’t as angry. If s/he still is angry, the chances are s/he won’t want to “fix you” or “tell you how to make it better.” If that’s the case, your next step is to suggest something you could have done. For example, “would it have helped if I sent out a notice to the senior management group after my initial conversation?”
9. If the person isn’t angry and does answer your question, use the “mirroring” technique again to clarify.
10. When you think you both understand what the solution is, summarize it. “So here’s what I think we agreed: xxx. Did I get it all?” Somehow, check it out with the other person.
11. You then make a commitment to the person. “OK, I commit to letting you know well in advance of anything that is likely to need the male health educators. And I also commit to talking it over with you to make sure I get your ideas and that the timing works with your health education schedule. How does that sound?” Get the other person’s to agree your commitment will meet his/her needs.
If you can’t make that commitment, make another one. Say clearly, “I will try to talk to you individually but it might not always be possible. However, I will definitely bring it up at a senior management meeting and get your input there.” Again, get the other person’s agreement.
12. Hopefully, by this time, you can then make a suggestion about a process or system that could be applied across the group. For example, “Do you think it would be useful to talk about this situation with the others in the senior management group, so we can all figure out how to communicate better with each other?”
If the other person agrees, you two can work together to draft a short agenda item and send it to Lorraine to get her to put it on the group meeting agenda. (All group members have the ability to put items on the agenda, I believe. Optimally, those agendas will be distributed before the meeting so people have a chance to think about the various topics. It will make the meetings more efficient.)
Remember:
• Pay no attention to their body language. Pay attention to your own. Sit with feet on floor and hands on table. Avoid crossing arms and legs. Look the person in the eye.
• Bring a piece of paper and a pen in case you are moved to write something down. It helps the other person feel heard.
• Focus on what the other person is saying. Avoid thinking about your response. Avoid defensiveness. Avoid accusation. Focus on solving the problem.
• Keep your focus on the goal – resolving conflict, building trust, and establishing forward movement for your relationship and possibly for the entire group.
Monday, June 2, 2008
Thinking Through an Offer of Coaching
A recent acquaintance of mine who lives in Scotland is hoping to relocate to the US. She apparently has a line of a job in HR - her current field - as well as an offer of coaching to help her pursue her dream of becoming a Life Coach. She asked my help in evaluating the coaching offer. Here's part of what I wrote:
That's exciting about a job in HR in the US - it's a great way to start you on your way to realizing your dream. Being in HR can give you tremendous credibility as you start on your coaching path. It will be important to think about how to package your experience as particularly relevant to coaching and helping people reach their own goals and dreams.
That's part of the context in which I'd assess the coaching offer. First, I would say that to my mind it doesn't matter whether you have a US-based coach or not. I do think you will have to have a coach, in order to have the experience of being coached - for three reasons.
1) You can use the support of having a coach help you set goals and reach them.
2) It's a GREAT learning experience! You will learn an enormous amount about how to coach from your coach - techniques and tools, philosophy, things that work and don't work with you (and possibly with your clients), getting a feel for the way a coach facilitates your own process of setting and reaching goals, the shifts you need to make in response to a client's shifts, etc.
3) Your prospective clients will be impressed and more comfortable because they know you are experienced in the coaching process.
A possible 4th reason is that by having a coach certified by the International Coaching Federation (ICF), you will be set up to meet one of its qualifications if you decide to go to coaching school and get ICF certification yourself. This link tells you the why and how of ICF credentialing at various levels. Click on the PDF version to read it. www.coachfederation.org
You'll see that being coached is part of the package, either as part of your coaching program or to submit as part of a "Portfolio" application for people who don't study in an ICF-accredited program. Also, you'll need 2 recommendations from qualified coaches, meaning ICF-certified coaches. So if you're interested in becoming certified, make SURE this coach has ICF credentials.
Here are some other things to consider in terms of evaluating this coaching opportunity:
* What kind of business do you envision yourself creating? Your own business from the beginning, or starting out under the auspices of another entity? There are certainly more and more entities that use coaches - and it could be a good way to start. Examples are: www.mylifecompass.com , www.michelangelomethod.com and www.successtracs.com. It's not as widespread as I think it will be in the future - maybe that's a goal? To set up your own coaching company with other coaches? Dream big!
* Does the prospective coach has experience similar to what you envision? Is s/he part of a larger organization or does s/he work on their own? If the experience is different, can s/he point you to other people, can s/he be a good resource for you? If s/he knows the coaching process well, then s/he should be able to help you reach your goals.
* Has this a person reached his/her own goals? Get a bio. How did s/he start? Did s/he have to weave their past experience into a set of credentials to set up their own coaching business? If you have a choice, choose someone who started as a coach in a way similar to how you'd like to start.
* Does this person work with and understand entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship? Being a Life Coach is essentially an entrepreneurial enterprise, and it would be ideal if not essential to have someone familiar with the processes and tools of setting up an enterprise. Some coaches focus only on coaching people to reach goals within a workplace - that's not your issue (unfortunately, there are very few executive coaches on staff anywhere, although that may change over time).
Usually, the first session is a free one to check for "chemistry." That's the time to ask these questions. If the chemistry isn't right, move on. The experience will move you that much closer to getting the right coach for you.
I hope this is helpful to you as you assess this offer. I will say that the price is reasonable so if you can afford it, go for it. I suggest that you wait until you get an offer in the US - if the offer will still stand, great. If it won't, you certainly can find someone else to help you.
That's exciting about a job in HR in the US - it's a great way to start you on your way to realizing your dream. Being in HR can give you tremendous credibility as you start on your coaching path. It will be important to think about how to package your experience as particularly relevant to coaching and helping people reach their own goals and dreams.
That's part of the context in which I'd assess the coaching offer. First, I would say that to my mind it doesn't matter whether you have a US-based coach or not. I do think you will have to have a coach, in order to have the experience of being coached - for three reasons.
1) You can use the support of having a coach help you set goals and reach them.
2) It's a GREAT learning experience! You will learn an enormous amount about how to coach from your coach - techniques and tools, philosophy, things that work and don't work with you (and possibly with your clients), getting a feel for the way a coach facilitates your own process of setting and reaching goals, the shifts you need to make in response to a client's shifts, etc.
3) Your prospective clients will be impressed and more comfortable because they know you are experienced in the coaching process.
A possible 4th reason is that by having a coach certified by the International Coaching Federation (ICF), you will be set up to meet one of its qualifications if you decide to go to coaching school and get ICF certification yourself. This link tells you the why and how of ICF credentialing at various levels. Click on the PDF version to read it. www.coachfederation.org
You'll see that being coached is part of the package, either as part of your coaching program or to submit as part of a "Portfolio" application for people who don't study in an ICF-accredited program. Also, you'll need 2 recommendations from qualified coaches, meaning ICF-certified coaches. So if you're interested in becoming certified, make SURE this coach has ICF credentials.
Here are some other things to consider in terms of evaluating this coaching opportunity:
* What kind of business do you envision yourself creating? Your own business from the beginning, or starting out under the auspices of another entity? There are certainly more and more entities that use coaches - and it could be a good way to start. Examples are: www.mylifecompass.com , www.michelangelomethod.com and www.successtracs.com. It's not as widespread as I think it will be in the future - maybe that's a goal? To set up your own coaching company with other coaches? Dream big!
* Does the prospective coach has experience similar to what you envision? Is s/he part of a larger organization or does s/he work on their own? If the experience is different, can s/he point you to other people, can s/he be a good resource for you? If s/he knows the coaching process well, then s/he should be able to help you reach your goals.
* Has this a person reached his/her own goals? Get a bio. How did s/he start? Did s/he have to weave their past experience into a set of credentials to set up their own coaching business? If you have a choice, choose someone who started as a coach in a way similar to how you'd like to start.
* Does this person work with and understand entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship? Being a Life Coach is essentially an entrepreneurial enterprise, and it would be ideal if not essential to have someone familiar with the processes and tools of setting up an enterprise. Some coaches focus only on coaching people to reach goals within a workplace - that's not your issue (unfortunately, there are very few executive coaches on staff anywhere, although that may change over time).
Usually, the first session is a free one to check for "chemistry." That's the time to ask these questions. If the chemistry isn't right, move on. The experience will move you that much closer to getting the right coach for you.
I hope this is helpful to you as you assess this offer. I will say that the price is reasonable so if you can afford it, go for it. I suggest that you wait until you get an offer in the US - if the offer will still stand, great. If it won't, you certainly can find someone else to help you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
