BEFORE MOVING INTO THE AREA OF PUBLIC VICTORY

"…….we should remember that effective interdependence can only be built on a foundation of true independence.

Private Victory precedes Public Victory.

As we look back and survey the terrain to determine where we've been and where we are in relationship to where we're going, we clearly see that we could not have gotten where we are without coming the way we came.

There aren't any other roads; there aren't any shortcuts. There's no way to parachute into this terrain. The landscape ahead is covered with the fragments of broken relationships of people who have tried. They've tried to jump into effective relationships without the maturity, the strength of character, to maintain them.

But you just can't do it; you simply have to travel the road. Habits 1, 2, and 3 come before the rest."

— The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: 30th Anniversary Edition by Stephen R. Covey

.

Where are you right now?

• Unconscious Incompetence: You are unaware of all that you do not know. Right now, your bliss is ignorance.

• Conscious Incompetence: You are now very aware of all that you do not know, and the stress and overwhelm start to engulf you.

• Unconscious Competence: You still feel overwhelmed and a bit lost, but are smarter, stronger, and performing better than you are aware of.

• Conscious Competence: You are performing as an A-player, and you know why what you are doing is working.


Where will you be in 5 years?

#IN5YEARS

.

Staying on Purpose

Staying on purpose is hard to do in this age of emails, blogs, Google and Wikipedia. I remember when the fax machine relieved stress, but now, we all want what we want and we want it....NOW.

I'm working in the box and not trying to be everything to everybody, but just doing what I can with what I have to work with. We can only do what we can do, pray like it depends on God, and work like it depends on Him also. Trying to work outside that box is more like a pipe-dream, a wishing well.

Looking back over my shoulder, reviewing the days events....I didn't get some things accomplished I intended, yet, I worked with what I had to work with and succeeded to the best of my abilities.

It was a good day. Challenging, but a good day.

Thank you Lord.

Succeeding in the box will only happen if we have the box defined and work hard at staying in the box.

We get outside that box when we try to shoot from the hip, or...when we attempt to circumvent writing policies and procedures, and/or following those policies and procedures.

We JUST WANT THINGS TO GO WELL. We want people to get along and JUST GET IT DONE.

Yet....we don't do the basics of defining the box we have to work in. We don't write the policy or procedure, we don't explain what we want to happen, we don't hold people accountable to their actions, or we attempt to hold them accountable to "things" we haven't explained very well..if at all.

Drucker wrote, way back in the 1967, He said that a good manager has to manage by walking around, and he has to repeat his desires over and over again. And if he doesn't keep repeating himself people will not believe he is serious. This has been quoted by management and leadership gurus many times since.

I've been told there is a book titled "Hope is Not a Strategy." The book is probably about managers that think they lead by hoping someone will adhere to a policy or procedure that hasn't been written. There's very likely a chapter on those that think something really needs to get done but doesn't take time to tell anyone else and instead hopes it happens.

I bet there's even a chapter on two people working on a procedure together, implementing that procedure, and hoping it is correct....even though other people in authority over the procedures actions haven't been consulted.

Thus, hope does not bring Joy at Work.

The Biggest Trouble With Trouble.....

Dr. Charlie Shedd, author of Letters to Karen and Letters to Philip, once said "the biggest trouble with trouble is that it keeps us expecting more trouble."

My dad would train his dogs and a few horses to not shy from the sound of a gun-shot. I aways thought it was strange that you would have to do that because all the dogs I grew up didn't run away from the sound of a gun. Yet, years later we bought a Collie and he would hear firecrackers and go absolutely nuts trying to get in the house he was so scared.

Failures in life can be like gun-shots. We are taught about succeeding and we hear about "when you get knocked down, pick yourself up, dust yourself off, and getting going again." But how many times, and what does it do to your attitude? I've talked, written, and tweeted about "what you say when you talk to yourself." That is actually the name of a book I have by Shad Helmstetter and it was the first book my wife ever say me purchase 25 years ago. She was wondering "what?" The techniques in the book helped me through some things then and have many times since. Without getting into a deep positive-mental-attitude agenda, we do need to be careful about what we think, what we say to ourselves, the "pictures we have in our head."

Remember that "failure is an event, not a person." (Zig)

Today, let's expect great things! Today is the day my Lord has made and I'll rejoice and be glad in it.

To that end.....God Bless

Thoughts on Following

I began the week with a focus on following; reading and learning about
the subject, how it's done well, not so well, the-good-the-bad-the-
ugly, and just literally what it is.

The week is ending with pondering all the same, but from more of a
perspective of how well I followed. And was followed.

The box needs improvement on both. While some would say I've followed well, I say it has been quite blind and not near courageous enough.

To that end...

Trusting Yourself First

I have a few firm beliefs. One of them is this; "if I can't trust myself, I will not trust others."

Covey, in The Speed of Trust, talks about self trust in connection with it being the principle of credibility. I agree that to be credible to others one first has to trust themselves, and how well one trust oneself is in direct proportion to how WELL one trust another.

I've struggle with this quite a bit though because there are areas in which I trust myself but don't feel I can trust another. So, I circle back around to - what is good trust? am I blindly trust someone? are the results of the trust in proper proportion to the trust being given in the event it turns out bad?

We have to be certain we have the proper concept of trust down first and then we have to keep circling back to our own trust.

Do I trust myself to do what I need to get done in even the small things. Example; definsive driving - I knew when I agreed to take definsive driving after getting a speeding ticket that it would be a very slim chance that I would set down at a computer for 8 hours, or go to a comedy class, or whatever. Give me a break! A comedy class about definsive driving. It obviously works but I'll have to have at least one more ticket first.

I digressed....with all that I have going on in my life, agreeing with the Bee Cave court to take definsive driving was just plain stupid on my part and after not taking it, missing the next court date, paying the money I would have gotten out of, but paying for the definsive driving anyway, I now have another court date scheduled as I try get out of the $595 fine for missing the court date for not taking definsive driving that I knew wouldn't happen. I remember walking out of the court last March thinking "Smith! What did you just do? You agreed to set down and take definsive driving? Just pay the other $100 and be done with it!"

And what does that have to do with trusting others? Everything. In order to have a propensity to trust, one has to have a true north, a core, a foundation to start with. That true north starts with ourself. The Bible says to love others as we love ourselves. I know, it says to first to Love God, but that's another blog.

God Bless, learn to trust yourself....to that end.

How Credible are You?

A previous posting on Self Trust has brought up some interesting conversations, including the whole concept of credibility and ethics.

I'll say first that ethics hass gotten distorted because of the technical teaching of how to be ethical without lying and cheating...or at least not technically.

So, how credible are you? On pages 50 - 53 of the book The Speed of Trust there are a serious of questions that form an assessment you can take and grade yourself. If you are honest with yourself, it will give you a fairly good idea of where you stand with yourself. After scoring yourself, and if you have others that will be honest with you, have them score you. The gap between your personal score of yourself and their score of you will give you a good idea of how much you need to improve.

If there isn't a gap; someone is lying.

Pay Attention to Other's Strengths

Leading well means a lot of things, including the awareness of the strengths and weaknesses of those in the box with you.

It's ok to develop strengths, or hire others to balance your team, but you can only work with what you have in your box; success comes from the box.

To train, that means you have to determine what to train and it takes time and money. That time and money is part of what is in the box.

Leading in the box, thinking in the box, means you're searching the matter out and not wishing for things to be different. It leads to positive results and not worrying about what is out of control anyway.

Staying in the box is real; it's being sure you're looking at the reality, getting better, staying focused, talking straight, and learning from mistakes.

To that end....

Communicate, But Connect First With Your Credibility

John Maxwell is writing a new book titled Everyone Communicates, Few Connect and he is posting chapter drafts of his manuscript for comments at http://johnmaxwellonleadership.com/.

He is asking for comments and stories, even corrections. Here is a bit of my comment to Chapter 8; The Connector Creates an Experience Everyone Enjoys.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Credibility. To truly connect with an audience it takes credibility.

When I hear John Maxwell speak, I'm connected to the credibility he's built with me as I've tested the principles from his books and tapes over the years.

On a more personal, and closer to home level, the communication (words out of one's mouth, or fingers), is altered by the credibility the communicator has with us. The connectivity is more real, more often, we see them in real-time. Such connectivity causes problems when you have someone you deal with on a daily basis, especially when the results of their work is not up-to-par; that connectivity will affect the communication because of the credibility. They might laugh and even be encouraged, but due to the credibility issues, the connectivity is short-lived.

Because of that erosion the communication and connectivity was only good for momentary grins. The communicator’s credibility is tied to their level of leadership and the lower the level, especially the Position level, will cause serious damage if the others are being driven by management to learn from the communicator.

True connectivity has to be grounded in credibility.
.
I listen to a new pastor and he sticks to what I’m familiar with; credible. He brings up something I’m not familiar with……I’ll have to check out what he said, and get to know more about him, his past, and his doctrine before I connect well with him; he doesn’t have good credibility with me at-this-time.

Yet, I listen to John Maxwell, or Tim Keller, or John Piper and I have few filters engaged. They’re credibility with me already assumes a higher level of in my connectivity. I expect to connect with them because of the credibility they’ve built with me over the years.

Similarly, at work, whether communicating in person or email, my connectivity to the other person is driven by the credibility that person has with me, and even how I feel my credibility is with them. Much like Covey describes in The Speed of Trust, credibility and connecting well spins around how we walk the talk, our behavior, how capable we are, and the results we get.

Communicate, but connect first with your credibility.

Note: go to John Maxwell's link and read more about Everyone Communicates, Few Connect

Counterfeit Credibility

Googling counterfeit brought up over 7 million hits; counterfeit behavior 948,000.

Counterfeit means; made in imitation so as to be passed off fraudulently or deceptively as genuine; not genuine; forged: counterfeit dollar bills. Pretended; unreal.

Credibility means; capable of being believed; believable: a credible statement. Worthy of belief or confidence; trustworthy: a credible witness.

Counterfeit Credibility then means that one's credibility, or credible statement, or credible witness is an imitation, deceptive, not genuine, and deceptive.

Normal counterfeit behaviors that destroys others trust in us, AND one's trust in oneself include:

Technically telling the truth
Legally splitting hairs
Spinning the real issues
Withholding information (well, they didn't ask the right question)
Hidden motives and agendas
Passive-aggressive behavior
Being driven by circumstance and not conscience
Being two-faced; pretending to care
Pretending to pay attention
Being busy to look busy and not getting results
Not accepting the blame when it is your fault

To that end....

How Deep is Credibility?

Credibility is deep and I have no doubt that I'm not even scratching the surface on my understanding of it. In other words, I'm sure I have HUGE blind spots about my credibility, what I know about it in general, how my own credibility is perceived by others, and how well I trust others' credibility.

In The Speed of Trust, author Stephen M.R. Covey lays out "the 4 cores of credibility;" Integrity, Intent, Capabilities, and Results. He uses as an example how, in a court of law, the opposing sides will try to either build up, or tear down the witness by strengthening or weakening these 4 cores (page 43).

Life is much like that court of law; we treat others many times based upon what they can do for us, or how well we like them.

It's about credibility; always talk about people as if they were there, don't distort facts, tell the truth in ways it can be verify.

To that end...

The Heart of Excellence Video

Following Well resource: http://www.heartofexcellence.com/HoE-Videos.htm (video #2)

Essential Leadership Discipline: Following Well

Following Well simply has to be an Essential Leadership Discipline, and what my reading so much has to do with both.

I read more than the average person and naturally run across very little about following. By little I mean almost never. In the last year, and I keep up with stuff like this, I've only ran across about following in LindedIn (one article) and the Bible. Nothing else, yet without followers, without following, without following done well we can't have good leadership.

The first time I remember reading anything of substance, written by man, about following was in a discussion on LinkedIn http://tiny.cc/gMgQM. This discussion, in May of this year, led me to the article mentioned in the discussion, that led me to the book http://tiny.cc/2YWMV.

Now, I've researched and found some other things written about following and Ira Chaleff, Courageous Follower, has written and lectured extensively about the subject. Yet, and I know I'm grinding an ax, what is up with leadership leaders not talking about and writing about it?

Having said all that, maybe this is just another blind spot I've got. But one thing I do know, following well is not something that comes easy and everyday I hear someone talk about being a good leader, or developing leadership, or some such very important discipline. Yet....

Ponder the thought of how well people follow you. Think about how important it is to follow well. You can find more on "following" by yping "follow" in the search for this blog.

Read Well, Follow Well, Lead Well

Life and Circles

I like circles, even imperfect circles. Life is full of circles; what goes around comes around, and such.

Robust Evaluation and Correction is about circling. The Bible says something to the affect of "what you don't get right, God will circle it back to you; again and again and again, until you do get it right.

Covey, in The Speed of Trust, uses a "back-and-forth" circle as visual to better describe his five waves of trust and their intersecting aspects; See, Speak, Behave.

This is a great way to show that while life is not a list of things to check off, but it's not a trip around the block either.

In this circle of life, as this diagram shows, we speak, behave, see or behave, speak, see or speak, see, speak, behave, see, or.....you get the idea.

Collins, in Good to Great, had a similiar idea in mind with the whole Hedgehog thing. I picked up the Robust Evaluation and Correction in Dennis Bakke's Joy at Work.

In any event, we can't coast around the circle, or check things off our list(s), and think THAT'S IT - DONE!. Doesn't happen that way. I'm reminded of a woman I once heard say, "I don't do housework because it never stays done."

Nothing stays done, not in an earthly since anyway.

God Bless, pay attention, and circle-back.

To Trust, To Follow

To trust another person, doesn't that mean you have to follow well? Don't you need to be a good follower? Don't you need to be followed well?

Hmmm. Something to be pondering.

Staying in the Box

Watching MSNBC's "Your Business" this morning I saw a great example of someone staying-in-the-box and succeeding.

A small business billard manufacturer had experienced a 50% drop in their production and while they had expaned to other typed tables and cabinets they were still not near capacity and I'm sure profitabilty was done.

The answer to their decrease in production turned out to be laying at their feet. The sawdust! At the suggestion of a customer, the small business began turning the sawdust into 'wood pellets.'

Wood pellets are used in some fireplaces instead of traditional sources.

This is a great example of 'staying in the box.'

The Box's Most Important Ingredient

Laying in bed this morning, telling myself to get self's lazy butt up, it hit me...."I haven't talked much lately about the second most important ingredient in the box; people."

Seriously, I really did have that thought HIT my thoughts.

People are the second most important ingredient of our box's contents. Remember what the engineer said when he dropped, or threw, all that stuff on the table; "here's what they have to work with." He said THEY. The rest is just stuff.

For me, THEY include some incredible people and I thank each and everyone of them for the deligence and prayers over the past few months. We've had some rough times in many ways but the core has proven itself well.

The box...it's all about what's in the box!

...and the glory of kings is to search matters out (Proverbs 25:2)

Case Study: Unwillingness to Accept Accountability

I believe it is appalling to be involved in a problem, yet, being unwilling to accept some level of responsibility. Actually, I find it shameful. The word Teflon comes to mind - some people just don't want anything to stick to them.

The case in point:

• an underwriter found suspected fraud in a file
• paystubs were not consistent and a verbal and then written verification of employment was sent to the employer listed on the loan application
• HR personnel at employer/medical center claim the paystubs are not the type they use
• letter of explanation, from employer (a doctor), was not on letterhead
• letter of explanation had the office phone number that was a cell phone

Note of Interest:

• It is probable that the applicant and applicant's employer are in fact legitimate. Google search of the records show facts of both as indicated in loan file

The problem:

• lender, nor Alethes, is unable to prove that employee in fact works for stated employer
• HR personnel at medical center has indicated, in writing, that applicant does not work there
• LO and processor insist it is a different doctor/manager with same name, yet have not produced any evidence to support; only emails and phone calls explaining that the lender and I have got it wrong
• the lack of acceptance by LO and processor to accept responsibility for not noticing and properly correcting the problem, or denying the loan, prior to submitting the loan to the underwriting

Assumption:

• if an underwriter or compliance person can find a potential problem, others involved with the file can find the potential problem and stop the file from going farther until the problem is eliminated

Results:

• day 1 - the lender initially suspended our ability to do business - not just this loan officer and processor, but the entire company
• day 1 - I suspended the loan officer, processor, and manager while the investigation is conducted
• day 1 - I requested all information sent to me by all parties
• day 2 - discussed matters with LO, processor, and manager
• day 2- based upon our overall track record, lender is allowing us to maintain a relationship with restrictions
• day 2 - confirmed documents that indicate inaccurate documents with HR Manager. HR Manager has tried to call the number on suspicious letter from employer given by processor - the phone answers and then immediately hangs up
• day 3 - the lender sent a representative to my office to discuss the problems. Lender is going to keep company's relationship but with additional restrictions
• day 4 - continue to investigate matter
• day 4 - processor has sent denial to borrower and there has been no expressed concerns from borrower
• day 4 - I went to San Antonio to meet with doctors but phone calls were not returned
• day 4 - reverse search of phone number shows that it is a wireless number
• day 5 - attempts to call phone number on letter is still unsuccessful. Number does not ring..goes to a fast busy signal

Excuses:

• there are multiple doctors with the same name and the lender, nor I, have contacted the correct people
• it's normal with people with new phone numbers to not have a voicemail
• the applicant is working for a doctor

As serious as this problems it, it is equally alarming is the processor, and to an extent the LO and manager's unwillingness to accept responsibility for any part of this problem. The processor is angry at me for the suspension of employment. I've been specific about with processor about the fact that I do not believe the processor did anything wrong other than not being diligent enough in working the file and succumbing to an LO's urgency to get a file submitted.

In a discussion with the processor on Day 4 about the conditions under which the processor would be reactivated, the processor let it be known that I had a law suit headed up my lower exterior (butt) and that the processor would never do business with that lender again.

So, while I've been mulling over all the ways I could have prevented this problem and what to do about the problem, others just want to claim it wasn't a problem and go on about their business.

A severe unwillingness to accept accountability.

How would I ever trust people like this to work for me in the future? In order to have trust, I have to be able to hold them accountable. I have to be able to check their agenda and their agenda seems to be; 1. submit file, 2. if some thing's wrong, lender will catch, 3 if lender catches, whoops, 4. next deal.

The lender in this case has added a quality control task to the process in order to do business. If I choose to allow these employees to work for me, I have to add processes or risk the same bad results.

This is a prime example of 1. decreasing trust = 2. increase costs = 3. decrease profits. The speed of trust slows down to a crawl with all parties.

All due to Unwillingness to Accept Accountability

Follow First

I continue to search out what it means to follow and yet, I find out more about leading that leads me back to being a better follower. And the loop continues...more of that robust evaluation and correction!

Through following I'm becoming more patient and I find that while I'm practicing patience others around me are grasping a better hold of their responsibilities. Yet, most of these that I'm following are subordinates on the org chart. And that's a good thing. Waiting, allowing others to lead has been refreshing, even a bit nerve racking!

I can see where many problems have stemmed from; people don't know how to follow. Or, at the least, they don't know how to be a good follower (Ira would say "they don't know how to be a Courageous Follower). Now, to have had more courageous followers like Cathy Smith in the past...today's results would have been much better.

Much of following has to do with behavior and if practicing Smart Trust has taught me anything it has taught me how to me watchfull of my followers' agendas and motives; which are played out in their behavior. Specifically, I've learned to look for passive-agressive natures. It's refreshing to have people like Carrie Hartwell that walk their talk. People like that are easy to trust; they allow themselves to be held accountable and their behavior matches up with their agendas.

So, slowly I practice the discipline of Following; learning what it means to be a good follower; a courageous follower; a follower that is working to make the best of where he is; getting good results of the box.

And hopefully that leads me to becoming a better leader; learning through change.

To that end...