Sometimes great leaders have to look back in history to find lessons to apply today. Today I'm going to take you back to some wisdom imparted in 1879 on how to treat your people.
The majority of you know I graduated from West Point. Part of my education there required we learn and remember (and be able to recite verbatim from memory) what was known as "knowledge" from West Point's history. Any upperclassman could ask any plebe (freshman) at any time to recite a piece of knowledge. Failure to do so correctly resulted in some "development time" (which was pretty unpleasant).
The hardest one to remember was Schofield's Definition of Discipline. When I would hear an upperclassman shout "FIGLIUOLO! START SCHOFIELD'S!" terror would strike my heart and I would begin reciting Schofield's Definition of Discipline which went like this:
"The discipline which makes the soldiers of a free country reliable in battle is not to be gained by harsh or tyrannical treatment. On the contrary, such treatment is far more likely to destroy than to make an army. It is possible to impart instruction and to give commands in such a manner and such a tone of voice to inspire in the soldier no feeling but an intense desire to obey, while the opposite manner and tone of voice cannot fail to excite strong resentment and a desire to disobey. The one mode or the other of dealing with subordinates springs from a corresponding spirit in the breast of the commander. He who feels the respect which is due to others cannot fail to inspire in them regard for himself, while he who feels, and hence manifests, disrespect toward others, especially his inferiors, cannot fail to inspire hatred against himself."
Major General John M. Schofield
Address to the Corps of Cadets
August 11, 1879
Wow. Talk about a mouthful. But MG Schofield has some great thoughts for today's leaders:
Harsh and Tyrannical Treatment
How many leaders do you know who lead through fear and intimidation? They may scream and yell. They may be demeaning. They may overtly (or implicitly) threaten people to get them to comply with directions.
It works for a little while but over time it's cancerous. If your boss does it, provide the feedback. Heck, forward them this article. Some bosses might not realize they're doing it. Others might just be bullies (and I've written about how to handle bullies before in this post. Click here to read it).
Tone of Voice
Your people take their cues not only from WHAT you say but HOW you say it. The vast majority of human communication has very little to do with words and much more to do with tone and body language.
Are you conscious of how your voice, posture, and gestures affect other people? At one point in my career I was informed that I can be VERY intimidating. Apparently my voice can boom and my eyes can get pretty intense. To me I simply thought I was paying attention and offering strong opinions. To others, some felt I was going to come over the table at them.
Since then, I have consciously worked at and tried to remember the feedback. Sometimes I have to deliberately soften my gaze and lean back in my chair to take some of the perceived aggression out of my demeanor.
Are you aware of how you come across? No? Go ask.
Respect
It's such a simple concept. The golden rule and all that. Aretha Franklin. You know.
Unfortunately we manifest disrespect in many ways and often without realizing it. Asking someone to stay late and miss a family event. Being ignorant about cultural norms. Simply not thinking about asking people to do simple tasks that are clearly below them. All of these can demonstrate disrespect for who a person is and what is important to them.
It's a simple fix - put yourself in their shoes. If you don't know what their shoes feel like, ask them. Ask about their culture and its norms. Ask if you've ever crossed a respect line. Some of these notions (and more "do nots") are covered in my post on 10 Reasons Your Team Hates You. Go read it by clicking here. It's a fun yet pointed read on things that upset your people.
The Bottom Line
MG Schofield had it right. The way we treat people means a lot. In a market where loyalty to the organization is low and high performers have many other options other than working for you, not being mindful of Schofield's advice can cost you a great team member.
You need to actively think about leading your people. It's so important that I've written on that topic both here on the blog (CLICK HERE to read it) and it has an entire section in my upcoming book One Piece of Paper: The Simple Approach to Powerful, Personal Leadership (come read about it and become a Facebook fan by CLICKING HERE).
Try treating your folks like it's 1879. Things might go a lot better for you. And if nothing else, you can grow an AWESOME beard.
- Mike Figliuolo at thoughtLEADERS, LLC
- Get the latest updates on my upcoming book One Piece of Paper - CLICK HERE
Postscript: This post is dedicated to my friend and classmate Adam Young who has been harping on me to write it for well over a year. Thanks Adam for continuing to push me to cover a great topic. I hope you enjoy it.
Monday, March 28, 2011
Why You Should Treat Your People Like it's 1879
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I totally agree with Schofield's Definition of Discipline and how a leader should treat other people. What I find ironic is that the hazing described in the blog (upperclassman asking the "plebe" to recite the definition knowing a mistake would result in unpleasant "development time") directly violates the lessons and virtues contained in the very definition used in the hazing. How much more powerful would that definition have been if students at West Point did not only know and understand the words contained in the definition, but could see it modeled and "in action" within the culture at West Point. The hazing by which it was "taught" certainly communicated: do as I say, not as I do.
@Anonymous - yes, it was ironic at times but for the most part, it served a purpose and more often than not, we were *asked* to recite it vs. being yelled at to recite it. The Academy has changed over the years and the upperclassmen are much more in tune with the proper application of Schofield's and truly do live it. There will always be those who don't but please don't take my one incident of hazing and extrapolate to all interactions at West Point. I was simply calling one out in particular to illustrate the point. Thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts.
Corresponding spirit:
...
In software, there are people who have no desire to move up the corporate ladder. In many organizations, there is only "Senior Software Engineer" and then positions where you don't write code.
Software Engineers consider ourselves craftmen much in the way you would find a blacksmith, hooper or wainwright in a bye-gone era.
Just because you are given the privilege of leading such a group of people, do not, for a moment think that you in any way "above" your engineers. You ai'n't. Many of them have been given a taste of leadership in the past, and it has left a bitter after-taste. We want to do, not watch. By writing code, you have the ability to ensure the success of the project to a far greter degree than by writing scheudles, going to meetings, and all of the other things that are required og managers. It is great that someone has the big picture, company wise, but someone needs to understand what the code does, does not do, and why the twain don't meet.
But even amongst engineers, especially amongs engineers, there is peer leadership. And the term Peer might only mean that two p[eople have the same title, not that they are in any way equals. Engineers have egos, but, as many have mentioned, the best engineers seem to be the most modest. They are the ones that quietly teach, and show that they can learn, even when they have been in the industry longer than you've been out of diapers. I may have been their inferiors in coding, but I knew that they did not view me as an inferior. As a result, I have attempted to "venerate and emulate" them.
I embrace your philosophy of leadership principles and related behavior described in your article, but find it surprising and somewhat contradictory that you use West Point as your point of reference. I'm glad to hear that the behavior and philospohy apparently has changed at West Point. Back in 1971 I can personally attest to the fact there was more of the true hazing and bullying tactics -- tactics that seemed to be more for the pleasure of the upper classmen than delivered in the true spirit of leadership training to us plebes. While I appreciate the need for discipline, structure and adherence to military structure and order in the training and development of officers, I observed too many instances of what I'd consider poor examples of true leadership. As a strong-willed and physically competent young man, I quite frankly found this to be disconcerting, distracting and disappointing to the extent that I rescinded my appointment at the Academy and sought my BSCE education through a more tradiitonal university and pursued career opportunities elsewhere (with no regrets). Incidentally, I found these displays and demonstrated lack of the true leadership you describe and embrace in your article to be prevalent all the way up to the higher echelons of the Academy, not just limited to the upper class cadets. I was exposed to and interviewed by the higher ranking officers in charge of the Academy during my progression through the ranks during my withdrawal process.
Mike,
That was one of your best posts ever. I skipped it when I first saw it on FB (fully planning on going back to it) so when I saw it here, I thought to myself, "That's a sign you'd better read this now!" And I'm so glad I did.
Leaders so often say to me "Why can't it just be like the military, where people actually follow orders?" I'm delighted to now have the "ammo" (pun intended) to help them realize that even in the military, leaders come in both the enlightened and unenlightened varieties. (But I imagine that the enlightened ones end up with far more stars on their shoulders...and more important, more dedicated followers.)
I'm doing a leadership training next week, and I'm definitely going to mention the quote--with a full credit to you, of course. I'll even plug the new book!
@Ken - thanks for the kind words. Glad you found it enjoyable and helpful. Yeah, it's kind of a misconception that military folk "just follow orders" because it really doesn't work that way. Encourage those people to read a book about military leadership sometime - they might be surprised. And thanks for mentioning the book. Just send them to http://www.facebook.com/onepieceofpaper to become a fan and get updates.
Mike, I could not agree with you more. This reminds me of an officer I worked with 12 years ago. I wrote my own blog post about her.
http://livinthedream101.blogspot.com/2010/12/fear-and-intimidation.html
Great blog!! Keep up the good work.
Post a Comment