Leaders Must Know When It's Time To Cut Its Losses

Although everyone always hopes and believes that their plan or program will succeed, at some point, there comes a time when it's time to cut one's losses, and admit that it might be preferable to go in a
different direction. Unfortunately, many leaders either give up on a program or plan too soon, or stick with it too long. Both scenarios generally prove unwise and unproductive, often becoming extremely expensive errors.

One of the glaring examples I have observed of sticking with something too long is often certain leader's desire to "stick with" their paid staff, Executive Director, or Management Company, too long. I have heard leaders say that they don't want to be blamed for making a bad decision in hiring the individual or group in the first place. When I hear this type of statement, I realize that I am dealing with a volunteer leader who has never been adequately trained in leadership, and the realities of leadership and management. I ask these individuals how long should one stick with someone or a group that "just doesn't get it," and doesn't get it done. I wonder how many more mistakes, or failures by either inaction or error or omission need to occur before action will finally be taken. If these individuals were trained properly, they would know that there should always be a "trial" or "probation" period with any new hire. Every task assigned, and every expectation stated, should be written and fully communicated.

Whenever a task is unsatisfactorily performed, it is the responsibility of leadership to inform staff of its displeasure, and "demand" a timetable for accomplishing the task in a satisfactory matter. If the staff member or management company are contracted, leadership must be fully informed and familiar with all the responsibilities, as well as the possible areas of recourse, to resolve the situation. This is not to say that leaders should be "gunning" for staff, or searching for errors. Rather, it means that if, repeatedly, over a reasonable period (reasonable meaning long enough period to fairly judge), the staff member does not seem to perform as needed, some action must be taken. Repeatedly, I have observed leaders complain about staff performance, and then assign additional tasks to the staff, when the leader needs something done properly. Einstein has been credited with saying that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, an anticipating different results. Einstein may have been observing many volunteer leaders when motivated to make that statement.

Volunteer leaders must evaluate programs on an ongoing basis. All estimates must be predicated on conservative estimates for revenue, and worst case scenarios for expenses. Is this program viable? Is this program valuable? Is this program meaningful? Is this program, as presently designed, effective? Is there an alternative way of achieving the desired results, more effectively?

Many organizations appear to view the budget process as an "exercise," and not something hard and fast. They simply carry-over programs and line items from one year to another, often simply adjusting by a certain percentage. However, those organizations, and the leadership of those organizations are making a huge error in judgment. Most organizations, especially small to medium sized ones, should use "zero- based budgeting" and view each line item as something that must be evaluated related to specific criteria that meets the evolving needs and makeup of an organization. I find it unbelievable that when I have asked leaders why something is done in a specific matter, I have often been told because that's the way the organization has been doing it for many years, and we think it works. Leaders who do not evaluate and re-evaluate, and compare alternatives should not be leaders. Once again, this often occurs because so many organizations do not properly train their leaders!

Are You a Manager or Leader?

Leadership versus Management- To be an effective Leader you must be able to "Influence" others. Being an effective Leader is not the same as being an effective Manager Leaders influence; Managers keep the "status quo" operating at an optimal level of performance. Leaders have to be able to influence others to move in another direction.

People choose to follow leaders because they have vision. A leaders vision inspires and motivates others to take action. A Manager typically does not focus his or her efforts inspiring or influencing others on a daily basis. How does one inspire others to follow? One inspires others to follow through their character, their knowledge, their actions and having a successful track record of significant achievements.

Take a few moments to write down on a sheet of paper, your most significant accomplishments that others received measurable benfit that improved their performance or helped them achieve a known goal. Then, list all the leaders you have developed by name? Follow this list by listing all the actions you initiated that significantly changed the results or path of a business, a charitable organization, an employee(s) or a friend(s). Follow this up by writing down how often you are approached for advice that is specific to the needs of an individual or someone in your business that has no reporting relationship to you? If your list are quite long, you are more than likely viewed as a leader. If not, no worries, you just need more experience and or/you need to change your focus from you to them. One note, being a manager does not mean you should not work on being a more effective leader. Do people follow you because they have to or do they follow you by choice? The best leaders have followers who choose to follow because their leadership has impacted them on a personal level. People will judge you by your actions and the impact your actions have on them personally. The words you choose have less meaning when compared to your actions. Work to develop meaningful relationships that have measurable value for the other person. Develop a deep and clear understanding as to the needs and desires of your people.

A test to help you determine if you are a Leader or a Manager. Join a charitable organization where no one knows you on a personal level and work to achieve a leadership position. To achieve this objective, you must remember why people would want to follow you. They have no predisposed reason to follow you such as status or rank. They will choose to follow you based on what I detailed above. Work on improving the organization by communicating and implementing your vision. Rally support around your vision by communicating not only how your vision will improve the organization, but how it will impact the team, the community and specific individuals. Meet with key stakeholders to answer questions and communicate your vision. Take the time to understand the needs and desires of the community, the team and all of the volunteers.

If you are able to effectively accomplish this objective, you will know you have what it takes to become a great leader.

When Leaders Should And Should Not Be Tactful

How often do true leaders hear the complaints, "Don't ruffle any feathers," or "Don't make waves," or "Don't hurt their feelings," or "You need to be more considerate or tactful"? Isn't it interesting to note who usually asks these types of questions or comments? One will rarely hear an effective leader questions a peer's tact. These statements are usually made by individuals, who while they may be well- meaning, are rarely able to proactively lead.

One of the requirements of being a true leader is being proactive - that is, seeing a situation as it exists that needs improvement, and tackling it before it becomes a major crisis. While there certainly is a time, place and need for tact, I have observed countless hours of wasted time in the name of tact. Tact is over-rated in management and leadership, because all too often "leaders" congratulate individuals on a "job well done," who did not do a good job in the first place, and these same "leaders" privately criticized at the time. There is a time for tact, but there is an even more important time to express disappointment. If the disappointment is never expressed, how would anyone know that what was done was not what was expected.

I have heard countless organizational "leaders" complain about lack of tact regarding paid staff performance. These "leaders" must remember that paid staff is precisely that - they are paid to do a job, and to do it properly. Patience and tact are necessary when a task is originally assigned, but when staff has repeatedly disappointed, a real leader must express disappointed in a clear manner. That is not a lack of tact nor a lack of request - it is a normal way to handle poor job performance.

However, leaders should and must be clear as to their expectations of both staff, and volunteers. This clarity must include goals, actions needed, and a deadline for each step. A mere suggested time line is often insufficient and ineffective. This should be stated first orally, with a chance for questions to be asked and answered fully. Then, the leaders expectations should be forwarded in writing (an e-mail is acceptable for this person).

Tact should not mean quietly accepting poor quality work and performance. It is fine to be tactful, but leaders who are more concerned with tact than with performance, are generally not leaders at all. I have consulted with hundreds of leaders, and much prefer dealing with a less tactful but clearer thinker, who is action and results oriented, and demands of others what he demands of himself, than what most "leaders" present themselves as. Unfortunately, it is much more common to come across the ineffective, but tactful leader. In reality, and in terms of getting things done, tact is over- rated!