Positive Psychology-Studying Ways to Find Meaning in the Workplace

In my last post I provided a very short history of management. 

For today’s post I’d like to switch gears again and look at a relatively new field of psychology…called Positive Psychology.

The following definition can be found on the website of The Center for Positive Psychology at Penn State University: 

Positive Psychology is the scientific study of the strengths & virtues that enable individuals and communities to thrive.

And, although there is no specific mention of the workplace in the above quote, one of the stated goals of The Center is to…

…build a science to support workplaces that foster satisfaction and high productivity!

This new approach to psychology is founded on the belief that people want to lead meaningful and fulfilling lives.

We want to lead meaningful and fulfilling lives and this includes the time that we spend at work.

This means two things:

1. As individuals we need to understand and develop our strengths and talents and be prepared to tap into these at work. 
2. As leaders or managers we need to manage people by building on their strengths and helping them develop their talents.

I’ve recently discovered that there is a NAME for these types of workplaces.

They are called “strength-based workplaces” and they tend to be workplaces that are characterised by productivity, employee satisfaction, customer satisfaction and profitability.

 Well, that’s all for today!

Lesley

A VERY Short History of Management

Learning from Douglas McGregor

Hello, 

First I’d like to thank Ben Simonton for his recent comment and thank all of you who have submitted comments over the past few months.

In my last post I wrote, “I’m not sure that the workplace is ready for workers to stand up and take responsibility.”

After some reflection I would like to add to what I wrote.  Is it that the workplace is not ready or are the workers not ready?

As with everything in life I think that the truth lies somewhere in between.

Here are some of McGregor’s ideas relating to Theory Y:

• the average human being learns, under proper conditions, not only to accept but to seek responsibility…
• the capacity to exercise a relatively high degree of imagination, ingenuity, and creativity in the solution of organizational problems is widely, not narrowly, distributed in the population…
• under conditions of modern industrial life, the intellectual potentialities of the average human being are only partially utilized.

I do agree with McGregor’s propositions.  In the right workplace, “under the proper conditions” people will flourish.

What are these conditions?

• Leaders who understand the importance of what McGregor is saying.
• Leaders who are able to put their egos aside and “invite” people to participate and contribute their talents, knowledge and skills.

People also need the resources and capabilities to do their work properly. They need to know how their work fits in with the goals of the organization. They need to be acknowledged and thanked for their contributions. They need to be respected.

What they don’t need is to be punished for speaking up and offering their ideas. Or share their ideas only to have them ignored or worse have their bosses take credit for them.

How many times will people be told NO before they stop sharing their creative ideas?

There are still a vast number of organizations in the world that want to control their employees. They still operate from the belief that people are inherently lazy and can’t be trusted.

Of course they would like to tap into the pool of imagination, ingenuity and creativity that McGregor identifed in his writings.

BUT these organizations want to do this in a top down, hierarchical non-democratic way in which management calls the shots.

Organizations can’t have it both ways!

Lesley

PS. Most of us want to make a positive difference in the world and this includes our places of work. 

PPS. We need to recognize leaders like Ben Simonton who have managed to shift the paradigm and engage workers in such a way as to “unleash their creativity, innovation and productivity”.

 

Be A Company That Cares

What does it mean to be a “company that cares”? Should we care? Why should we care?

Most organizations will tell you that they care about their customers. This is especially true in service organizations. Of course some are better at this than others.

The focus on customer satisfaction is a legacy of W. Edwards Deming the godfather of the Quality Movement. For many people CQI or QI (Continuous Quality Improvement or Quality Improvement) is about measuring quality outcomes.  The emphasis here is on measurement!

In fact, this is only half the equation. The other half of the equation involves creating an organizational culture that recognizes and supports the “internal customers”…also known as the employees.

But what about the people who work in these organizations ensuring that goods and services are provided in such as way as to ensure customer satisfaction?

Some organizations are so focused on the external customer that they don’t give their employees a second thought.

But organizations that are truly committed to customer satisfaction know that it’s really about the workplace culture or environment, it’s about enlightened leadership, and it’s about how people are treated.

I recently came across an organization that is focused on creating companies that care about their “internal customers”. 

This organization is called The Center for Companies that Care . Check out their website!

The Center’s Mission is to encourage and celebrate businesses that prize their employees and are are committed to community service.

On the website they provide the following list of 10 characteristics of a Company That Cares:

1. Sustain a work environment founded on dignity and respect for all employees
2. Make employees feel their jobs are important
3. Cultivate the full potential of all employees
4. Encourage individual pusuit of work/life balance
5. Enable the well-being of individuals and their families through compensation, benefits, policies and practices
6. Develop great bosses who excel at managing people as well as results
7. Appreciate and recognize the contributions of people who work there
8. Establish and communicate standards for ethical behavior and integrity
9. Get involved in community endeavors and/or public policy
10. Consider the human toll when making business decisions

The site is also full of ideas and resources to help companies incorporate  these 10 characteristics into their culture.

All of these provide a strong foundation…ensuring that customer satisfaction is not a slogan.

Have a great week!

Lesley

Be the Change You Wish to See in the World

This famous quote by Mahatma Maghandi is one of my favorites. In essence Ghandi is telling us to step up and take responsibility. I think this quote speaks to the leader in all of us. And yet…so many people feel powerless to make changes in their places of work.

Over and over again I hear competent, intelligent, experienced people complain about bad bosses, co-workers who won’t pull their weight, restrictive policies and procedures, lack of information, bullying, lack of trust, and feelings of powerlessness.

Surely it doesn’t have to be this way?

What is really tragic is that many of these people LOVE the work that they do but hate the places that they work in. I have friends who have quit their jobs or taken early retirement because they could see no other way out.

One fellow worked as a professional engineer for the federal government. Toward the end of his career (he was in his early 50’s at the time) he convinced his superiors to let him work from home.

He hated going into the office everyday. But even working at home did not insulate him from the negative impact of his workplace. He eventually retired at age 55.

This man’s wife was a teacher and her story played out in much the same way. She LOVED teaching but increasing found that the work environment in the schools made it impossible for her to do what she loved.

She also took early retirement and as a society we lost two talented, highly educated, and experienced professionals.

I know that this story is being played out over and over again throughout North America.

In her book, The Tragedy in the Workplace: The Longest Running Show in the Country, Danna Beal has this to say about today’s workplace:

“Many people feel the situation is hopeless and believe they must just live with it. It is like a giant elephant in the living room. Everyone knows it is there and just keeps tiptoeing around it.”

Danna goes on to say, “The problem today is that most people are assigning responsibility for their lives and life situations outside themselves.”

Constantly seeing oneself as a victim and complaining about one’s situation is a recipe for disaster. Victims feel powerless and feel helpless to do anything about their situations.

What would Ghandi suggest? Ghandi had a mission in life. He had a belief in a better world. This is what kept him going.

In order to follow in Ghandi’s footsteps and be the change we need to be able to envision a better future.

Have a great week and don’t give away your power!

Lesley

The Right to Manage

I think that people should earn the RIGHT TO MANAGE. There are so many bad managers out there creating havoc in organizations. Somehow the selection process is not weeding them out.

A few years ago I had the pleasure of meeting Kenneth Cloke and Joan Goldsmith. They were teaching a workshop on conflict resolution at the Justice Institute in New Westminster. At the end of the workshop they gave each of us a book that they had written called The End of Management and the Rise of Organizational Democracy.

Can you imagine working in a democratic organization?  Would that mean that we would “elect” our leaders as we do in our communities? What a concept!

I’ve heard it said that leaders depend on having followers and that people only follow leaders that they admire and respect. This is not a relationship that can be coerced.

In North America we pride ourselves on our democratic governments BUT the idea of democratizing our workplaces is not widely talked about.

In my last post I talked about the difference between organizations and communities. Organizations are structured as to manage (control) people’s behavior. Communities form around common needs/interests. Communities need forms of control too but we’ll have to leave that for another discussion.

Cloke and Goldsmith have some interesting propositions. “We disagree that managers are essential to the work process, that we need them to get employees to work responsibly, and that it is impossible to solve problems or get anything done without them.”

They continue by stating, “All forms of managing other people’s work hinder their responsiblity, creativity, flexibility, responsiveness, and growth, even in small subtle ways. They prevent employees from being deeply connected and passionate about their work and keep them in a state of child-like dependence”.

Even though I like what Cloke and Goldsmith have to say I’m not sure that the workplace is ready for workers to stand up and take responsibility. Some of us are but a great many people are happy with the status quo, even though they may complain loudly.. about poor management.

The unhealthy dynamic between management and workers dates back over a hundred years and although a great many books have been written suggesting ways to change this power imbalance the status quo is slow to change.

Many of today’s managers have been influenced by the work of Douglas McGregor.  McGregor’s approach to management is commonly referred to as Theory X and Theory Y.

Managers who are influenced by Theory X believe that people are naturally lazy and that they work mostly for money and status rewards.

On the other hand, managers who are influenced by Theory Y believe that people are naturally interested in setting goals and achieving them and that they take pride in their achievements in all areas of their lives.  

What do you think? Are people naturally lazy and in need of strong managment or are people ready for a more democratic style of organization?

Lesley