Deity is not one of the definitions listed in the dictionary if you look up the word “goals.” So exactly how did goals start ruling the corporate world, and what needs to be done to change it?
We all know the familiar adage that a goal without a deadline is a dream. We cut our collective corporate baby teeth on the “SMART” goal strategy. Many of us may actually remember the moment that corporate scripture was imparted. With the knowledge of setting a specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, time constrained objective, we were elevated from being a regular person with vague ambitions to someone with a CAREER. We were empowered.
The problem with too many of the goals in today’s world is that they do not empower. They oppress. Clearly they have a place in the business world. They help us manage and move projects forward. They help us determine how to allocate resources and define what we need to achieve. They help us understand whether we are accomplishing what we set out to do.
However, what happens to a team when goals become sticks and hammers in the hands of hapless managers tasked with achievement? What happens when the goals become a spider web of tangled, conflicting purposes? What happens when incredible, high achieving employees are trapped and targeted by well-intentioned measurements?
These are the dangers and pitfalls that one must consider as a true leader. Most corporate executives and senior managers are hard-working, driven people who strive for excellence and continual growth. They typically look ahead to evaluate trends and business needs, and they are constantly scanning their surroundings for information and relevant advantages. One thing they sometimes fail to do is look back or down.
This is not a recommendation to make a habit of revisiting every decision or backtracking. It is a reminder that corporate strategies are based on teamwork. Every team member has a role and a function. If a team member is unable to perform effectively, it negatively impacts the company. Most performance measurement systems are intended to be guides to encourage growth and development. In today’s fast paced, constantly changing world, they have too often become tools for intimidation and control used by ineffective managers.
While strategic thinking is valuable and imperative for success, one of the biggest issues in the business world today continues to be the actual execution of strategy. One of the clear impediments to effective execution is traditional multilayered management structures. Traditional top down management presumes experienced senior managers mentoring and guiding entry and mid-level underlings to success.
Even companies with phenomenal products and ideas will fail as their competitors step up with new disruptive ideas, if they continue to operate using this outdated, inefficient business model. The very basis and assumptions that the model is built upon are inaccurate in today’s business environment. It is relatively common today for new graduates to assume well paid, influential positions because of specialized training or familiarity with state of the art software, coding languages, or design. While these graduates bring a lot to the company, they frequently have a very specific and goal oriented focus. Their contributions are by nature often linear, task oriented, and limited in scope.
This, coupled with the current project and gig driven economy and vast numbers of corporate downsizes and restructures, frequently leads to knowledgeable business people with extensive experience reporting to people with a fraction of the knowledge that they possess. It is not unusual for employees to come to a new company with a wealth of experience garnered at a prior company. As a leader, if you presume that expertise in specifics equates to general business experience, you are failing your company.
Many strategic imperatives fail not because they were bad ideas or plans, but because the business execution was amateurish. When stake holders are uninvolved or unknown, risk assessment and project scope is inaccurate. When lack of understanding about real issues in the day-to-day jobs of customer facing teams is the rule instead of the exception, strategic plans can only outrun performance for a limited time. When goals are created based on ivory tower projections without calculations or allowances for real world obstacles, the goals become the problem.
Unfortunately, many managers in today’s corporate world habitually react by pressing harder on employees to meet ridiculous, often contradictory objectives instead of providing feedback to leaders about ineffective, unrealistic goals that undermine morale and performance. When did managers become cheerleaders and yes people to those above them on the corporate ladder? Is this simply an extension of the “snowflake” mentality permeating society? Managers, by definition, are supposed to "manage"- not pacify corporate higher ups.
Coaching is one part of managerial responsibility, but for some reason, it has become all-encompassing in the business world today. Too many managers believe themselves to be coaching when they are, in actuality, regurgitating corporate crap. A coach is a coach, a manager is a manager. There are differences, and while positivity and supporting company goals is desirable, there seems to be a surplus of managers today who smile, dress in matching shirts, and cheer their fearless leaders, while throwing their employees and direct reports under the bus.
As a leader, one needs managers who have the ability to identify and analyze problems in the areas that one may not see or interact with directly. This is particularly critical in customer facing areas. Leaders rely on their management teams to communicate issues and recommend potential solutions to resolve them. This happens far too infrequently in current corporate structures. Front line and area managers spend inordinate amounts of time on coaching and corrective feedback that has nothing to do with employee performance and everything to do with management failures.
Part of management is setting realistic goals and measurements. The problem with bigger and better can be likened to a balloon. No matter how big the balloon, it holds a finite amount of air or helium before it bursts. Stretch targets are good. Your employees feeling helpless and beaten down daily because of poor goal setting by management is not. Evaluation and development of processes and procedures is also a part of management. Unfortunately, it seems that the rush to market has obliterated some of the basic common sense considerations in this area.
Too many managers do not communicate problems and issues to leadership because they do not want to be accused of being “negative.” Since when did identification of a problem become negative? Perhaps this is oversimplification, but it seems that too many projects and plans are being thrown together haphazardly and tossed into play according to the “minimum viable product” rule of thumb. That might be an effective process for a brand new product, but why has this become an acceptable standard for sales offers and seasoned, well established companies?
If a company has standards of excellence with prices to match, customers expect, and deserve more. Of course it is a competitive marketplace, and technology is multiplying at warp speeds, but that does not change the basic precepts of business. Perhaps instead of allowing a management team to continue setting inflated goals and adding more stress to the world by placing unreasonable and unrealistic demands on employees, leaders should eliminate some management layers and converse directly with those performing the actual jobs.
Wouldn’t it be nice to know if that new software based infrastructure is creating major bottlenecks for service reps before signing off on project completion? Who is providing the real long-term solution? The manager standing over a rep’s desk admonishing him or her to type faster and multi-task, or a rep who types up documentation of the number of steps in a lengthy, time-consuming task and submits it for review by the user interface and design team?
These ideas particularly need to be examined around your sales and service teams. When did you last revisit the goals for the customer facing teams in your organization? I will not rehash the statistics and numbers about customer satisfaction, how much it costs to attract a single new customer, and the cost of retention versus marketing because those numbers are readily available. Suffice it to say, all the dynamic strategies, planning, and products are absolutely worthless without customers. That means team members who have the ability to make customers feel satisfied, appreciated, or happy should be valued.
Unfortunately, there is a still a prevalent attitude in the corporate world that customer service is a "basic" skill easily provided by minimally trained entry-level workers. If that were the case, then why, years into the growth of corporate structures and management, do companies continue to struggle with service? Why do companies seem more willing to pour money into retention and evaluation of the reasons customers leave than they do into maintaining customer relationships by valuing real customer service skills?
That is a rhetorical question easily answered. Customer service is a cost center, not a revenue producing arena, and the profitability of customer service does not lend itself to easy measurement. The current corporate trend seems to be intent on two things: automation and cramming every possible performance metric imaginable into the customer service umbrella. There is nothing inherently wrong with teaching service reps to recognize and use sales opportunities, but stop trying to convert customer service centers into sales machines.
Verbatim scripting and arbitrary sales transitions on problem calls are absolutely ridiculous. They alienate employees and irritate customers. Have you actually looked recently at what your customer service, IT, and sales teams are being told to do? Most are being treated like robots and expected to perform from three to six different jobs. Additionally, service and sales are two distinct areas although they often crossover. Most companies trying to incorporate the two are failing miserably.
One cannot empower a team by setting them up for failure. When managers and executives under your direction set up metrics that are contradictory, unrealistic, and ultimately abusive to your employees, you are responsible. It is unacceptable that employees at any level of your company come to work every day feeling that no matter how outstanding their efforts and performance, they are one step away from termination. They should not face failure for doing their job based on poorly designed goals.
Ultimately, with the expansion of social media and the internet, customer experience is becoming a more influential metric, not less. It can have significant impact on a company’s worth. Now would be a good time to examine the goals being used throughout your company. When did you last evaluate employee perception of goals? Why do the goals exist? Do they make sense from the perspective of both the employees expected to achieve them and the company strategists? Is the goal really contributing toward your strategy or impeding it?
Goals matter, but without consistent, competent execution they become pointless.
Comments
Post a Comment