T.A. Wilson & Associates

Well it appears that the doormen of New York have won. According to DNAinfo.com an agreement has been reached that will grant a 10% wage increase along with a 20% increase to their benefits. It seems those who live in buildings that have doormen won’t have to sort through mail, screen guests, or take out their own trash. For those of us who don’t live in buildings that have doormen we might find this entire situation amusing. I admit that I do. But let me shed a different light on the subject.

Perhaps if we looked at it from viewpoint of employees losing the services of a group of people they depended on and they now have to do the work of that group. It may be that they can do the work but is it a good use of their time? Is it cost effective to have them take on this additional responsibility? If you have a group that is highly productive, what happens to that productivity by adding a set of disjointed responsibilities to the mix?

Ok am I reaching here? Yes I am I just find this story downright funny. Regardless of what these people are used to or that having a doorman is included in their rent or condo fees, it’s just downright funny to me to think this people are worried about having to take out their own trash, sort their mail, or hail their own cab. But as I’ve already said in an earlier post, only in New York.

© Timothy A. Wilson. All Rights Reserved

Peter Drucker coined the term “knowledge workers” long before it became fashionable in today’s business lexicon.  In The Daily Drucker 366 Days of Insight and Motivation for Getting The Right Things Done, he points out that “knowledge workers will have to manage themselves, they will have to place themselves where they can make the greatest contribution.”  Anyone who considers himself or herself a knowledge worker needs to understand who they are, what their strengths are, what are their values, how they can work to achieve results, where do they belong, and where don’t they belong.  As important as these aspects are toward becoming a knowledge worker, the most important aspect is having good and consistent feedback so you as a knowledge worker can work to improve and get better.  This means, getting clear and specific communication on what you need to improve upon.

For most people who work in the corporate arena this feedback is supposed to come from your direct supervisor or manager.  However, the ability to give meaningful and constructive feedback to a subordinate is something that many supervisors and managers find very difficult.  Too often, when supervisors or managers attempt to provide constructive feedback, the message is vague, mixed, unsubstantiated, or so convoluted the receiver requires Solomon like wisdom to understand the message.  This doesn’t work for a knowledge worker.   The knowledge worker needs feedback that is clear and concise, so they can initiate appropriate action. 

If you are a supervisor or manager who have knowledge workers working for you, you need to hold yourself accountable for making sure you deliver feedback that is clear and concise, and not subject to misinterpretation.  As a knowledge worker, you are also accountable for letting your supervisor or manager know how to provide you with useful feedback.  By insuring you’re, getting feedback you can use allows you to analyze the information, so you can make appropriate decisions on the projects you and your team are working and you can place yourself where you can make the greatest contribution.

This allows the knowledge worker, supervisor, and manager to ACT R.I.G.H.T™ in your respective organizations.

 © Timothy A. Wilson 2010. All Rights Reserved.

With all that is going on in the world that can be reported on and discussed a recent article in the New York Times caught my attention, “New Yorkers Brace for Doorman Strike.” Since I’ve always had to open my own doors, this article grabbed my attention and as I read it dawned on me that this could only happen in New York.

Don’t get me wrong I have nothing against Doormen. According to the article this all purpose job pays on average about $40,500 and with benefits it escalates up to $70,000. It seems like this a pretty good paying job. Not taking anything away from the Doormen, but is that hard to open doors?

Then it hit me people who live in the buildings that have Doormen, are worried that they may have to take out their own trash. Anyone that is a parent can understand that problem. If you have teenage children, getting them to take out the trash usually results in having to ante up.

According to the article the Doormen handle more than just taking out the trash, it involves sorting mail, greeting children when they come home, helping returning tenants unload their cars and carrying luggage, running of elevators, and sign for packages. Ok, I guess that can be hard. After all signing for that FedEx or UPS package must require some special skill that only Doormen possess.

But if the tenants find out that it’s not that hard to sort mail or take out the trash or sign for their FedEx or UPS packages they might not mind not having someone open the door for them. Hmm, what’s that old saying, I remember now, “be careful what you ask for because you just might get it.”

Maybe the NYC Doormen should think about that before they go out on strike.

A friend and fellow consultant will be speaking next week in Omaha, his topic is Zen Leadership. An appropriate topic choice since he’s an expert in Jujutsu and Aikido which is a polite way of saying don’t try to sneak up on him. As we talked about his upcoming speech, I noticed that one area he will cover has to do with “don’t care if you live or die”

When I questioned him about this he referred me to the movie First Knight with Richard Gere in which he played Lancelot. In a scene where he had just beaten someone in a joust, the person asked him to teach him to fight the way he did. His response was, first you have to not care if you live or die. When the person heard that he left.  He wasn’t willing to go all the way.

As we continued our discussion, it came to me that people who desire to lead, need to understand this concept. No, I don’t mean that they have to behave in a constant reckless manner, but understand what it will take to really lead a team or an organization. Successful leadership encompasses a number of skills and traits. Yes, one can be taught to be a leader, and there are any number of books you can read about leadership skills and how to go about acquiring them. But the willingness to move forward and take the kind of risk that could end your career, is in a way not caring if you live or die, or another way of putting if you succeed or fail.  I understand that this may sound a bit radical, but it’s not. Here’s why.

In our collective experience (me and my friend) we understand that those individuals who have the Lancelot philosophy can act that way because of their training and experience. This is no fool-hardy rush to take on risk just for the thrill. Truly successful leaders have learned how to push out the boundaries of their area of moderate risk. For the uninitiated what appears to be a high risk situation has become one of moderate risk for those who have the training and experience of dealing with risky situations over a period of time. They have also learned that having a clear image of what it is they are trying to accomplish helps them immensely to achieve their goals and objectives.

These types of leaders understand power, how to use it, how to administer it, and most importantly that sharing it will not lead to their demise or downfall. They understand that when they give up power, they really become more powerful for a simple reason their team is able to accomplish a great deal because they’ve become empowered and understand fully what they are capable of accomplishing. Through their actions they complete projects on time and within budget, their leader is viewed as someone who can get things done through other people. In essence she becomes the First Knight. She doesn’t’ care if she lives or dies.

My guess is my colleague will give a very good speech because he doesn’t care if he lives or dies.