How to Drain the Pity Pool and Why You Should

 

 

If you’ve been supervising for any length of time, you’ve noticed that people play games. There are patterns of behavior you’ll see over and over- we’ll call them “games” because indeed, they seemed to be group activities defined by specific, if unwritten, rules, and serving some purpose, even if not consciously understood and always with a negative outcome.

In our last issue, the “whining” game was addressed, and as promised, this issue looks at a closely related game: “Aw Ain’t It Awful.” The best example of this is a group of employees standing around their cubicles or the copy machine, or having a beer after work, and griping about how screwed up the company is, how all the managers are clueless, how so many co-workers (none of whom are present) are idiots, lazy, or …….. This game can go on indefinitely, generally until it is time to open the doors and serve customers, go to lunch or the next meeting.

Although a game, by definition, is focused on a negative outcome. There are no winners, only losers-the company, one’s peers and the individual.

Why do people engage in this game? People who play this game get to feel Right and Righteous, a step above those being ‘awfulized.” There is the drama and attention that comes to the one who begins the game or who can ‘one-up’ the previous player. In short, it can become a workplace amusement that isn’t really amusing at all!

Aw Ain’t It Awful may make us feel better in the moment but does nothing to make our lives or the situation about which we are complaining better in the long term. It may even have the effect of making participants feel that nothing can be done about the situation.

Often the boss and his or her behaviors or a organizational change (think implementing a sales culture or a change in the employee benefit plan or a change in the core processing system, etc.) is the focus of the Aw Ain’t It Awful game.

So, if you are a player in the Aw Ain’t it Awful game and you realize that you’ve been drawn in, the fix is simple—simply stop playing. Just say to yourself, “this doesn’t serve me or the situation well- and walk away. Find something positive to do.

One of the most positive things you can do is address the issue with someone who can do something about the “awfulized” topic. For example, if someone in the group is complaining about the boss say, “I think it would be most helpful if you would talk to the boss about this. It may require courage on your part but it seems to me that if you had done something that irritated the boss, and he/she told others without giving you a chance to deal with the issue, you’d be quite upset.”

In many cases the “awfulized” topics relate to organization changes. Did you ever wonder why every model of implementing change strongly recommends follow-up staff meeting topics designed to gauge the impact of the change, work out the bugs and help move employees through the resistance-to-change stage to the acceptance and return-to-productivity stages? Failure to include this in follow- up meetings frequently leads to the Super Bowl of Aw Ain’t It Awful. Most managers who have regularly scheduled staff meetings and one-on-one coaching sessions report little Aw Ain’t It Awful activity.

Just one “rotten apple” can as they say “spoil the barrel” so if you have one, it is best to deal with it. Sit this person down and address the issue. “Harriett, what’s bothering you? I’m asking because I’ve noticed you are spending some time chatting up others and I get the drift that you are not pleased about something. I’d like to hear what’s on your mind.” After listening—-and I do mean listen until she spills her guts—you address the issue(s). Then outline your expectations for her to address issues with you not engage those (the group) who are unable to do anything about it. It will be helpful to describe to her the “Aw Ain’t It Awful” game and how unproductive it is.

Keep a watchful eye on Harriett and after a few days of seeing no game activity, pull her aside and thank her for taking your feedback to heart. If however, Harriett is back playing the game, you must immediately sit her down and let her know you are NOT kidding.

There is great value in addressing the Aw Ain’t It Awful game with your staff and outlining how you’d like to see problems and concerns dealt with in more productive ways. As a supervisor, when a new employee joins your group you should, as part of your one-on-one orientation cover this along with other issues of communication between yourself and individual employees and the group as a whole.

(Eric Berne, Psychologist, wrote Games People Play, in the 1960’s and it has stood the test of time. Check it out along with YouTube videos for more on this topic.)

Is Your Oxygen Mask On?

Guest Article by Jason Barger, Author/Speaker/Consultant/Creator of the “Step Back from the Baggage Claim” Movement

 

---

The flight attendant reminds me quite often, “If the plane is in an emergency situation and the oxygen masks drop from the ceiling, please make sure to put your mask on first before you assist those sitting around you.”

The message is simple. You are no good to anyone around you if you donʼt take the time to breathe in the oxygen that you need. So, before you go running off to help those around you, make sure you put your mask on first.

Itʼs a good thing they remind me. I forget quite often in my daily life. No, not on the airplane, but in life. In my rush to cross things off the to-do list, make a difference in the world, and accomplish all that stands before me, I forget that I need to put my own mask on first. I forget that I need to find time and space in my own life to breathe in fresh air, new thoughts — things that feed me.

The very best leaders, coaches, teammates, parents, CEOs, and citizens of Planet Earth are people that live a leadership ethic that involves breathing in that which sustains them. They make time to Step Back and fuel themselves so they are able to serve, teach, and lead those around them.

And the results are always the same. When weʼve put our mask on first, weʼre better at being the person we want to be in the world. When do you make time to put your mask on?

Jason Barger is a globally celebrated Author/Speaker/Consultant and creator of the “Step Back from the Baggage Claim” Movement – featured in the New York Times, National Geographic Traveler, Kiplinger, Book TV, and more. His message and spirit has resonated near and far with people passionate about making a difference in the world. To learn more about Jason and his books and programs check out his web site: StepBackFromTheBaggageClaim.com . You may also follow him on twitter @JasonVBarger

4 Ways to Avoid Holiday Stress

 

 

1) Give Yourself Some Space. Give yourself permission to not do it all for once. This isn’t a competition for the best holiday season ever. It’s ok to say, “No, thank you for asking but I have other plans/priorities.”

2) Plan Ahead—write down and narrow down what activities are most important to you and your family. Focus on the 20% that give you 80% (or more) pleasure of the holiday season.

3) Find Ways to Give—it might feel like this adds to your stress, but actually “doing for others via time and or donations makes us happier and there’s plenty of scientific research to prove this. Some have termed this the “helper’s high.”

4) Be Proactive with Finances–Stick to Your Budget—WE are all in the financial services business and we know you’ll be seeing many people after the holidays that could have used this advice. So follow your own advice and remember it is the “thought that counts.”

 

 

Moneyball in the NFL?

Staff Article by Eric Timm, Director, TRUSTCOMPARE®

---

I really enjoyed writing my last Fill-Ins contribution on the use of metrics in Major League Baseball, and verifying the thesis of the book and movie “Moneyball.”

As I worked, I wondered if the concept of a low-cost provider as a success story would work in other professional sports. I immediately thought of the NFL, as Forbes magazine compiles an annual team valuation report in both football and baseball. This was the source of most of my MLB data, so the thought of a similar study of the NFL would be interesting and likely informative.

In some respects, my analysis of MLB data was much easier as the book “Moneyball” had already identified the Oakland A’s as the team that was among the most efficient at generating wins with a low payroll cost. The comparison to the New York Yankees was likewise easy as they had the highest team value of all MLB franchises. The data was readily available via Forbes for a number of years, but specifically for the 17 years that Billy Beane has been the GM of the A’s. Given that Forbes has compiled similar data for the NFL, the data collection side of the equation was simple (although Forbes has recently changed their website and a few years of data were not available), and I ended up with only 8 years of data.

After a good bit of thought, I realized that baseball is a sport more ideally suited to metrics than is football. Baseball has more discrete events (at bats, pitches, outfielding chances, etc.) than does football. Most events in football depend on two or more participants, such as receiving (should an overthrown ball count against a receiver or the quarterback?) or tackling (how do you account for a tackle when a teammate helps corral the ball carrier vs. an open field tackle?). The kicking game appears to be more assignable to individual players, but a bad snap or hold can affect the statistics. I don’t have any idea of how to assess the effectiveness of an offensive lineman, unless you create a composite metric that factors in quarterback protection, yards gained, or yards per possession. Until a full set of measurable metrics are derived for football, the use of metrics as a predictor of performance will be somewhat limited.

One of the reasons baseball’s Oakland A’s have been so successful is their ability to identify players who produce runs (thereby winning ballgames) at a lower cost relative to other players. Major League Baseball operates with a “Luxury Tax,” which is a premium charged to those teams that choose to exceed the league maximum payroll. The luxury tax concept provides a certain level of parity for small market teams who cannot afford to pay an unlimited amount for player salaries, while large market teams can merely pay the tax if they so choose. Compared with baseball, the NFL enforces a strict salary cap that cannot be exceeded (the salary cap was instituted in 1994). The salary cap increases by a specific percentage each year per the league’s collective bargaining agreement and the league very precisely defines how salary cap components are calculated.

The market for labor in professional sports is a monopsony, where a single buyer (within a given franchise area) has sufficient market power to restrict the sellers of athletic talent and artificially hold salaries down. It does not really seem like the athletes are suffering too badly, but baseball’s luxury tax model seems to be less restrictive than the NFL’s salary cap. You often hear of NFL players referred to as a “salary cap casualty” when they are released or have their contracts restructured to provide their team with more room under the cap. One impact of the salary cap structure is that there is a management component to a team’s success, in that building a winning team requires careful navigation of multi-year contracts, bonuses, and other components of the team’s payroll.

Using 8 years of data, I ranked the teams year-by-year using their payroll cost per win, and averaged their results to create a composite average of their efficiency. I also gathered annual “composite power rankings,” which average several power ranking indexes from various sources. The power ranking calculations take into account a number of variables, such as each team’s strength of schedule, road vs. home performance, and a contributor’s personal opinion (these are far from a scientific calculation). Using a composite of power rankings smooths some of the bias resulting from these being less-than-rigorous calculations, while using the same source for the composite rankings yields a reasonably consistent set of data over the years.

Taking the average of both the payroll cost/win and power rankings, I expected to be able to identify a team or teams that were the most powerful but also most efficient. I had initially decided to use the Dallas Cowboys as the high cost/high power standard, filling the role of the Yankees in the baseball study (the Cowboys, like the Yankees, have the most valuable franchise as estimated by Forbes). As I looked at the data I realized that the Cowboys have not been as successful in the past 8 years as some other teams. Ranking the team averages for both cost/win and power ranking provided two factors that could be compared easily to hopefully identify the low cost/high rank teams.

The results of the Moneyball NFL analysis? My colleague Chris Ziegler predicted the salary cap would strongly influence the data, and he was correct. In short, due to the salary cap, there are no teams that are more efficient than others in terms of cost per win. Those that had a low cost per win on average were also those with the highest power ranking on average. The results of the two rankings are nearly identical, with the top 11 in both metrics comprising the same teams with a few appearing in different orders. After reflection, since the salary cap system limits the total team payroll and each team generally ends up close to the total cap limit, the only “efficiency” shown is that winning teams have a lower cost per win. This is to be expected since the only variable that really changes is the denominator.

Unfortunately, there is not enough room to print the entire table of data, but the top 5 average for cost/win and power ranking are shown on the following page:

Team	8-yr Average Cost/Win	8-yr Average Power Ranking
New England	1	1
Indianapolis	2	2
San Diego	4	3
Pittsburgh	3	4
Philadelphia	7	5

To see the entire set of data, visit http://data.trustcompare.com. Use the username and password of “tcdata” when prompted and you can view my detailed analysis, including some snazzy graphs that illustrate the results for the NFL over time. You can also view my original MLB analysis there as well.

My conclusion? The NFL’s imposition of the salary cap was designed to create parity across the league and as a mechanism to help manage the rate of growth in salary costs–the results of my analysis suggest that payroll costs are generally the same across all teams. Any real dynasty in the NFL comes from the combination of a front office skilled in managing the salary cap, a general manager who can evaluate talent, and the coaching staff who can motivate the players to build a team capable of winning the most games. New England and Indianapolis both come to mind as two teams who have consistently had successful teams in the past.

Are there players in the NFL who are more efficient at their positions than their counterparts on other teams similar to how the Oakland A’s identify potential players? Most likely, but given the fact that there are fewer metrics used in the NFL it might be more difficult to objectively identify those players. Also, the structure of the salary cap system makes it more difficult to identify exactly which teams have the most efficient players–unless you draw the entirely possible conclusion that the Patriots and Colts build their teams in this manner and the results speak for themselves.

The implication for the Trust industry (and the obligatory mini-commercial for our data analysis products)? Often the patterns within the data are not readily apparent without some sort of measurement, tracking, and analysis. We believe that creating a long-term data set and comparing your data to a group of like peers can help you better understand your operation and help with managing for success. If you are not calculating and analyzing your metrics, what do you use as the basis for decision making?

 

 

If I Could Just Get in the Door

 

---

I don’t have any trouble making a sale once I can get a prospect to meet with me. It’s getting that first meeting that’s a problem for me.

 

Sound familiar? We are told by many workshop participants that the most challenging part of the sales process is getting someone who you think might be a potential client to agree to meet with you. Let’s face it, unless you are inundated with referrals from satisfied clients, centers of influence and referrals from bank employees you are going to have to make at least some of your own rain by getting on the phone and calling people.

Even if the people you are calling are bank customers, why would they want to meet with you? How do you generate interest from a potential client? Calling to get first meeting appointment is easier said than done, right?

A general benefit statement is the tool that’s most effective in getting you in the door. A general benefit statement is a very tightly crafted statement about what you do that is of help to the prospect/client. You create a general benefit statement that echoes the needs of the prospect. Presumably you’ve learned something about the prospect’s needs from someone who knows this person (think Google, LinkedIn, colleagues, centers of influence or bank records). Sometimes you simply have to make an educated guess based upon gender/age/stage of life and other “researchable” facts. A general benefit statement communicates to the customer what you and your organization can do to solve his/her unique financial services problems/challenges. It targets what you can do for the prospect. The “hook” is the benefit you are offering. Here are some examples:

• We provide clients who are approaching retirement, with the peace of mind that their investments are appropriately structured to support the life style they’ve planned for their retirement and to enjoy the freedom of knowing their money is being watched over by experts. We help people make sound decisions to enjoy a full-life.

Or,

• We guide our clients through a precise planning process that ensures that their financial future will be secure, their loved ones protected and they have the financial freedom to realize their retirement dreams while they are still young enough to do whatever they want to do.

Or,

• Our commercial bankers provide business owners like yourself with the tools you need to spend more time managing your business and less time dealing with financial hassles. In addition, Ms. James, we have helped many business owners like you save money on taxes while offering your employees more desirable benefits.

Your goal is to start a conversation, so once you’ve delivered the general benefit statement follow it with a question that invites the prospect to engage in a conversation about what is important to him/her.

I work with clients who have a range of needs. Some like you are just starting a professional career and family. They appreciate our expertise in helping create and plan for a secure future for their family that includes children’s education and building a savings for a secure retirement. Do you know how frustrating it is when you are someplace you’ve never been and you get lost?

(The prospect will say, “Ya, but what does that have to do with it?”)

You answer: “Well, what I do is work as your financial GPS to keep you from getting lost and to keep you on the right road. What are you thinking about in terms of security for your family?”

Once you’ve captured the prospect’s interest and learned more about his/her situation in a brief conversation, it makes sense to suggest a meeting so that you can learn more about the prospect’s needs.

If you’ve done a good job with your general benefit statement and follow-up questions and demonstrated excellent listening skills, chances are you’ll get the appointment.

The alternative is to call a prospect and ask, “Can I meet with you to tell you what we do and how we do it?” We know that’s not working and chances are very high that you’ve gotten the brush-off. What would you rather have-an appointment or a dial tone? Get busy creating your general benefit statements.

 

 

The Last Word

with LOYD POHL

---

Grow Your Own!

 

 

As the planning season in financial institutions winds down for the year, I have been reflecting on how the issues (goals?) of an organization have evolved over the decades. Growth, Regulatory, Capital, Profit are (and always will be) primary goals. But as we evaluate the SWOT exercise results from this year (and the last couple years), we are seeing a recognition of one of the biggest weaknesses or threats: the inability to find “professional” staff. This becomes even more obvious for organizations we have led through a Depth Charting exercise. For the purposes of this piece, Professional Staff are Commercial Lenders, Trust Officers, Branch Managers, Financial Advisors and Operations Managers.

While our search division is doing very well, we continually struggle to fill “officer” positions for the same reasons institutions struggle. Management positions are actually easier as they are often filled by people moving up! But how do you fill the “plain” officer positions? Finding people is, of course, easy! Getting them to consider changing jobs is very difficult. Dual-income families, lifestyle issues, fear of the unknown, lack of compensation advantages to moving are all contributors to the difficulties. Actually, finding people is harder as there are (after a decade of cost-cutting) simply fewer of those “officers” in the industry.

So, what is an organization to do? Certainly one solution is to “Grow Your Own!” Let’s review the challenges of this staffing strategy:

It is expensive. You will not keep all the people you invest in. Part of the solution is to be very deliberate about who you hire and the process you use in the development program. This will lower – not eliminate- the cost of turnover. You also want to make legal and moral deals with the participants to avoid training staff for your competitors. Additionally, part of the planning for the program is to ensure that the participants will have, and understand, their career path options. This is one of the causes of losing a trainee during or after the program: They do not perceive the opportunities in your organization that match their perceptions of their abilities.

This model has to be a strategic commitment from your organization. For it to work, you have to commit resources (budget and management time) to this program. Specifically, the people in your development program needs to be paid by HR – not by the line managers. There are many reasons for this but one is that if the line managers are paying out of their budget, they will move participants out of the program to a “production” role too soon.

You do NOT have to be a large organization to commit to this staffing model. We are working with a 300 million dollar bank that has started this program. We are providing the Sales and Sales Management components of the program. It does work better in larger organizations because of two simple mathematical reasons: 1) The investment in staff is typically smaller and can be absorbed more easily into the organization’s P & L. 2) There are more likely to be the opportunities (and options) for the participants to move into roles that fit their individual career objectives.

This “Grow your own!” strategy needs to be well-designed and funded. If you are interested in help, let us know!