What's Best Next

You are here: Home / Archives for 2011

Archives for 2011

A Better Answer to the Question "What is Your Greatest Weakness?"

by

A common job interview question is “what is your greatest weakness?” (Or some variation of it.)

A common response is to answer in terms of what you are bad at or tend to overdo (but often trying to give it a positive spin by making it seem the flip-side of a strength!).

That’s an unnecessary and unhelpful route to go with that question. The reason is that it misunderstands the nature of a weakness.

A weakness is not what you are bad at. A weakness is any activity that drains you. Or, in other words, a weakness is any activity that depletes you.

Understood in this light, it is not simply the most honest thing to give a straight answer, it’s also the most strategic because you don’t want to have a job that calls upon your weaknesses primarily (for you will be unable to excel and will end every day drained). What you want to do with your weaknesses is make them irrelevant by managing around them. Adjust the position so it doesn’t generally require you to do what weakens you, for example. Or find a partner who is strong where you are weak.

Given these things, here’s an example of a good answer to the question: “What is my greatest weakness? A weakness is an activity that drains you. Understood in this light, one of my greatest weaknesses is falling behind on email. If I let my email go for a few days, I feel like I’m under a pile of nagging, unfinished tasks, and it drains my energy. [Then, you go to how you have addressed the weakness and make it irrelevant:] As a result, I have a daily process for getting my inbox to zero, and I make sure not to skip more than a few days unless circumstances really call for it. I find that as long as I make it a priority to keep my in box processed regularly (which I have a system for), I don’t have to deal with the sense of being drained from a collection of unprocessed and unknown emails.”

Don't Aspire to Mediocrity

by

Few people aspire to mediocrity. But they often drift into it because the temptation to cut corners and take the easy route is often not recognized. It’s not recognized because it’s often veiled in the advice to “be reasonable.”

But if you are going to be effective — that is, if you are going to truly serve people well (which is what effectiveness is about), then you can’t settle for being reasonable. You have to go the extra mile.

Here’s how Patrick Lencioni puts it in his latest newsletter:

If you’re not willing to do things that others would say are over the top, and if you’re not comfortable being criticized for being annoying and for having standards that seem perhaps just a little too high, then you’ll drift toward mediocrity.

And though no one would ever aspire to being mediocre, it is more tempting than we might realize.

After all, the majority of people out there will encourage us to take the easy route, because that isn’t threatening to them. They’ll support us as we justify cutting a corner here and lowering our standards there, because it isn’t reasonable to do anything more.

And I suppose that’s the whole point. Success isn’t about being reasonable. It’s demanding. It’s over the top. It can even be annoying. But it’s worth it.

Read the whole thing.

Reducing Costs Does Not Always Increase Profits

by

To be blunt, taking measures at cost reduction is often a naive way of trying to increase profits. It’s not that there’s no place for it, but it’s typically first-level thinking that fails to see the big picture.

It’s like rent control in government: on the surface, it looks like controlling what rental properties can charge will keep prices down. But ultimately what it does is decrease the incentive for people to rent property, thus creating a housing shortage. This has been the well documented outcome in cities like New York and others, all over the world (see Thomas Sowell’s Basic Economics: A Common Sense Guide to the Economy for a great treatment of this).

The reason is that cost reduction measures often cut into the very things that produce the revenue for a company — including intangibles such as employee morale. (Yes, employee morale translates into revenue because it results in employees going the extra mile, treating customers better and more proactively, generating ideas that can enhance productivity and performance, and is even a more effective way to reduce costs because it reduces turnover.)

Here’s what Jeff Pfeffer has to say on this in What Were They Thinking?: Unconventional Wisdom About Management:

In case you haven’t noticed, in spite of the many rounds of wage cuts, the major airlines have continued to lose market share to the discount carriers such as JetBlue and Southwest and have continued to bleed money. . . . That’s because the solution management seized on — cutting workers’ pay — actually doesn’t do very much to make organizations more profitable and competitive or even, in some cases, to reduce costs.

Instead, cutting employee wages often worsens company problems. Hourly rates of pay simply don’t do nearly as much as most people seem to believe to determine a company’s — or even a country’s — competitive advantage. That’s because wage rates are not the same thing as labor costs, labor costs don’t equal total costs, and — in many instances — while it is n ice to be low cost, low costs and profits aren’t perfectly correlated either. . . .

The competitive success of airlines such as Southwest, Alaska, and JetBlue depends on lots of things besides wage rates. For a start, it’s nice to be able to offer customers a product or service offering they actually want to buy. . . .

Virgin Atlantic Airways has consistently pursued a strategy of offering more amenities and better service for both its business-class and economy fares, and has generated a profit when other airlines have struggled. After further upgrading its business-class seats and service in 2004, the carrier reported a 26 percent increase in business-class traffic for the fiscal year ending in February 2005. . . .

In the automobile industry as well, profits depend on more than just costs. Profits are also affected by brand image and product design and quality, all of which affect how much people are willing to pay for a car.

There is much more to being profitable (or, for a non-profit, having the funding they need) than cutting costs and being efficient. Often, the things that are most efficient — such as making sure employees feel that they are valued and respected and treated well — appear inefficient at first. But that’s just a short-term perspective. In the long-term, these “inefficient” things are actually more efficient, because they are the best prevention of the truly large and inefficient costs of high turnover and low quality.

Is It Really More Efficient to Remove Layers of Management?

by

From What Were They Thinking?: Unconventional Wisdom About Management:

Isn’t it better to have fewer managers and a flatter structure?

The answer, according to both Edmondson’s research and the experience of Southwest Airlines as described by Jody Hoffer Gittell, is it depends on what the managers do.

If they just give orders and assign blame if things go wrong, you’re probably better off with fewer of them.

But if leaders actually help people coordinate and learn, more are better.

Good point. He continues:

The problem with having fewer managers is actually quite simple: since people have been taken out of the organization, those that remain have more to do unless something has been done to decrease the total workload.

And there are fewer people in the organization to ensure coordination, reflection, and learning. In order for leaders to act as coaches, there must be enough leaders to do the coaching.

Just as coaches help their teams perform better by standing on the sidelines and providing perspective and information that players in the thick of things might otherwise miss, so in companies it is useful to have people whose job responsibility includes learning, coaching, teaching, and reflecting, or else those activities won’t occur.

The Best Career Advice You Were Never Told

by

The most effective people make career choices for fundamental reasons, not instrumental reasons.

That’s one of the key take-aways from Dan Pink’s excellent book The Adventures of Johnny Bunko: The Last Career Guide You’ll Ever Need.

Dan Pink’s book is excellent on two counts. First, it presents the material in a creative and engaging way: the book is actually the first American business book in manga. I was slightly familiar with this approach because the resource team at DG worked with some people a few years ago to adapt some of John Piper’s content to a graphic novel format. Dan Pink has done the same thing here, except to teach career principles.

Second, the content is helpful — and counterintuitive. Here are the six lessons of the book:

  1. There is no plan.
  2. Think strengths, not weaknesses.
  3. It’s not about you.
  4. Persistence trumps talent.
  5. Make excellent mistakes.
  6. Leave an imprint.

If I can, maybe I’ll do a series that briefly covers each of these points.

For now, here’s some advice for those who aren’t sure what to do next: make your next choice for fundamental reasons, not instrumental reasons.

Here’s how Pink explains it (via one of the characters in the book):

You can do something for instrumental reasons — because you think it’s going to lead to something else, regardless of whether you enjoy it or it’s worthwhile.

Or you can do something for fundamental reasons — because you think it’s inherently valuable, regardless of what it may or may not lead to.

And the dirty little secret is that instrumental reasons usually don’t work. Things are too complicated, too unpredictable. You never know what’s going to happen [and note that this is biblical! Proverbs 20:24; 16:9; James 4; etc.]. So you end up stuck. The most successful people — not all of the time, but most of the time — make decisions for fundamental reasons.

They take a job or join a company because it will let them do interesting work in a cool place — even if they don’t know exactly where it will lead.

There’s the key idea. If you don’t know what you want to do next, do what you think is inherently valuable. You don’t need to know where it will lead. And, almost certainly, it will lead to someplace interesting, because, first, you already are doing something interesting (that was the point of your choice!) and, second, we are more effective when we are doing what we love to do.

And even if you do have a clear goal for where you want to end up (which is a good thing), don’t fall into the trap of thinking that you will best get there by making a bunch of instrumental choices to do things you don’t really want to do, but which will “keep your options open” and eventually let you get closer to your interests. This approach usually backfires. Instead, have your large goal, but stay open to seizing unplanned opportunities to help get you there, and along the way seek to follow the path of doing what you find inherently valuable.

Crossway Impact: Rewards with a Mission

by

I’m excited about Crossway Impact, the new rewards program with Crossway Books.

I like this program because it not only offers readers several annual benefits, but also enables you to send 5% of the money you spend to a ministry of your choice. This is a helpful variation on the one for one idea, pioneered by places like TOMS Shoes (which gives one pair of shoes to someone in the developing world for every pair that you buy), because, in the very act of making your purchase, you are able to make an impact beyond your purchase.

So, way to go to Crossway for doing this. (And, if you can’t guess, I would suggest designating your 5% to go to Desiring God — but any of the ministries they offer would be a good choice!)

Here’s the description from the Crossway site:

Here at Crossway, we’ve been thinking of better ways to serve our readers and partner with like-minded ministries.

That’s why we’ve created Crossway Impact—a rewards program for readers who want to invest their resources wisely—buying books AND making an impact.

Crossway Impact is designed to reward our readers with the following annual benefits:

  • 3 FREE books (choose print or e-books from a monthly list which must ship with a purchase of any amount)
  • 25% OFF all your purchases on Crossway.org
  • Free shipping on orders over $50
  • Exclusive monthly offers

Crossway Impact also gives you an opportunity to make a difference with every book you buy by sending 5% of the money you spend at Crossway.org to a ministry of your choice. Now, ministries like Desiring God, The Resurgence, and Revive Our Hearts will benefit right along with you—a real win-win.

For the first year of the program, we’re making these benefits available to as many Crossway readers as possible by letting you determine the value of your rewards (worth at least $40 in free books alone!). The only thing you have to do is name your own membership fee.

It’s as simple as that.

Crossway Impact Members get a year-long discount, free books and shipping, special offers, and the chance to make an impact with every purchase. We hope you’ll join us by signing up today.

Proposal for a Message at the 2011 Web 2.0 Conference

by

This is a proposal I submitted for the 2011 Web 2.0 Conference. Though it was a secular conference, I submitted a proposal on how there is a biblical basis for web usability because it seemed that that topic would be of general interest. I’m posting it here as an example of doing public theology — that is, of seeking to bring a gospel-centered perspective on things into the wider culture in a (hopefully!) winsome, appropriate, and respectful way.

Description (65 words)

Website usability is not simply a good idea; there is actually a case to be made for it from the Bible. This transforms not only how we understand usability, but also how we understand all of our work. Now matter what your religious views, it is surprising (and helpful!) to see that the Bible has something to say about even the more sophisticated aspects of everyday life and work.

Full Description

The first principle for an effective content strategy is: have excellent content and make your site _usable_. You want users to think hard about your content–not about how to use your site.

But usability doesn’t only make your site better and more effective. There is also a case to be made for it from the Bible, because it is a way of serving your users.

This session will show how usable websites are an expression of the core biblical commandments to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Luke 10:27) and put others before ourselves (Philippians 2:4). Even for those who do not have religious beliefs, or who do not share a belief in the authority of the Bible, it can transform our work to see it not simply as a job or a way of making money, but also as a way of serving and doing good for others.

Secular thinkers such as Patrick Lencioni and Howard Schultz and even Tom Peters have long pointed out that work is not just about the work, but serving others and even uplifting the human spirit (see, for example, the beginning of Schultz’s latest book, “Onward: How Starbucks Fought for Its Life Without Losing Its Soul,” or the last chapter of Lencioni’s “The Three Signs of a Miserable Job” or Tom Peter’s discussion of “transcendence” in our work in “In Search of Excellence”). This session will show how these thinkers are echoing an even greater reality that is in tune with the worldview of the Bible itself. We will also make an application to exactly why usability is a matter of serving others well, and how understanding usability in this way motivates even greater excellence–for since excellence is hard work, it is ultimately only possible when we put others (in this case, the user) before ourselves.

Seeing these things is not only surprising and engaging in itself, but will also give those who attend a snapshot into the worldview of many of their own web visitors, as a majority of web users do have at least a loose religious affiliation and concern for spiritual issues.

Additional Information

The purpose of this session is not to persuade people about religion or create any controversy in any way at all. People can choose to believe what they want, and my aim here is not to address any controversial issues.

Rather, it is simply interesting and illuminating to see that the Bible has things to say about the everyday things we do in life–including really cool things like interactive design and making sites usable. Even (especially) people who have no religious viewpoints or do not hold to the Bible as a special book will find this session interesting as they see how a book that many in our culture _do_ hold in high regard has very engaging things to say about everyday life and the world of technology.

While the content of my session will be engaging and interesting and surprising, it will not be religiously controversial. The compelling and interesting thing is the fact _that_ the Bible has relevance to these things, and _how_ this is so. And that is broadly interesting and applicable. Additionally, this session will help meet the diversity value listed in the criteria by which sessions are selected, as it looks at web design from a unique perspective not typically addressed at the conference, while also shedding light for attendees into how many of their users think about the world (as 50% + of the population does at least have some lose religious affiliation).

Be a Resource, Not a Limiter

by

The people that are most helpful in any organization are those who take initiative, rather than simply doing what they are told. What organizations need from their people is engagement, not mere compliance. (And, conversely, this is what makes a job most satisfying — being engaged, rather than simply seeking to comply).

This has implications for managers as well. If you manage in a certain way (namely, with a command and control focus), you incentivize compliance. But if you realize that management is not about control, but rather about helping to unleash the talents of your people for the performance of the organization, and that this comes from trusting your people and granting them autonomy, then you see yourself not as the “boss,” but as a source of help.

A manager is a source of help and a catalyst, not a limiter or controller.

Godin touches on this well in his recent post “Moving Beyond Teachers and Bosses“:

We train kids to deal with teachers in a certain way: Find out what they want, and do that, just barely, because there are other things to work on. Figure out how to say back exactly what they want to hear, with the least amount of effort, and you are a ‘good student.’

We train employees to deal with bosses in a certain way: Find out what they want, and do that, just barely, because there are other things to do. Figure out how to do exactly what they want, with the least amount of effort, and the last risk of failure and you are a ‘good worker.’

The attitude of minimize is a matter of self-preservation. Raise the bar, the thinking goes, and the boss will work you harder and harder. Take initiative and you might fail, leading to a reprimand or termination (think about that word for a second… pretty frightening).

The linchpin, of course, can’t abide the attitude of minimize. It leaves no room for real growth and certainly doesn’t permit an individual to become irreplaceable.

If your boss is seen as a librarian, she becomes a resource, not a limit. If you view the people you work with as coaches, and your job as a platform, it can transform what you do each day, starting right now. “My boss won’t let me,” doesn’t deserve to be in your vocabulary. Instead, it can become, “I don’t want to do that because it’s not worth the time/resources.” (Or better, it can become, “go!”)

The opportunity of our age is to get out of this boss as teacher as taskmaster as limiter mindset. We need more from you than that.

What is the Fruit in John 15:5?

by

In John 15:5, Jesus says “Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing.”

What is the “fruit” that Jesus has in view here? Here is a helpful exposition of the text from DA Carson, from his The Gospel according to John:

There has been considerable dispute over the nature of the “fruit” that is envisaged [in this text]: the fruit, we are told, is obedience, or new converts, or love, or Christian character.

These interpretations are reductionistic. The branch’s purpose is to bear much fruit (v. 5), but the next verses show that this fruit is the consequence of prayer in Jesus’ name, and is to the Father’s glory (vv. 7, 8, 16).

This suggests that the “fruit” in the vine imagery represents everything that is the product of effective prayer in Jesus’ name, including obedience to Jesus’ commands (v. 10), experience of Jesus’ joy (v. 11 – as earlier his peace, 14:27), love for one another (v. 12), and witness to the world (vv. 16, 27).

This fruit is nothing less than the outcome of persevering dependence on the vine, driven by faith, embracing all of the believer’s life and the product of his witness.

Great Managers Reject the Notion that Trust Must be Earned

by

Marcus Buckingham, from First, Break All the Rules: What the World’s Greatest Managers Do Differently:

And what of the notion that “trust must be earned”? Sensible though it may sound, great managers reject it.

They know that if, fundamentally, you don’t trust people, then there is no line, no point in time, beyond which people become suddenly trustworthy. Mistrust concerns the future. If you are innately skeptical of other people’s motives, then no amount of good behavior in the past will ever truly convince you that they are not just about to disappoint you. Suspicion is a permanent condition.

Of course, occasionally, a person will indeed let you down. But great managers, like Michael, the restaurant manager from the introduction, are wired to view this as the exception rather than the rule. They believe that if you expect the best from people, then more often than not the best is what you get.

Innate mistrust is probably vital for some roles — lawyering or investigative reporting, for example. But for a manager, it is deadly.