As a manager for Walmart, I was constantly relying on my reputation and along with that, I had a constant flow of "cashing it in" and building it up again. I will mainly discuss my reputation with my associates in this post. One of the things I absolutely abhor about Walmart is its lack of respect and responsibility to its associates.
The culture mainly consisted of a disregard for associate needs and outside responsibilities. What I mean by that is, if any associate wanted to go to college and work at Walmart, the company was (and still is) extremely unaccommodating to this end. As a manager, I recognized this fact and maintained an open, communicative relationship with my employees, during which I expected my employees to inform me about any outside activities which I would accommodate time off to the best of my abilities. There were many times when I took much of the blame from the store manager for having understaffed departments during the day (when my folks were in school) but I would be so bold as to suggest that my employees were the happiest employees in the store. I maintained extremely low turnover and staff from other areas of the store wanted to work for me because they knew I was understanding of their needs.
I was also very understanding when an associate was late, and rarely gave them "points" toward a formal write-up for simply being late. While it is possible for an associate to be terminated after showing up late just 10 times, I never gave points to my associates when they were late. When tardiness became routine, I had frank discussions with my associates and explained the importance of their promptness. They could see my side of the story and understand the pressures their tardiness imposed on those around them, and it made them want to come to work on time (even if it was out of guilt).
All of my understanding and willingness to help did not come free, though. My employees knew that as a result of accommodating their needs, they would need to accommodate mine. Once I felt I had given an employee enough, I would call upon them to give something in return. Many times this involved working over night for two or three nights with me and a couple of peers to reset the floor displays. Very rarely did an employee ever tell me that they weren't willing to help me during an extenuating circumstance, because I had done the same for them.
I realize this concept is very much like gift exchange which we've discussed in the past. But, I think this applies here because the gift giving was reliant upon my dedication and reputation of helping my employees with their needs. I also think this is very closely related to teamwork because each member of my team also had a reputation which they wanted to uphold to help the entire team. I think guilt was a strong driving force for making my team successful, as they felt guilty if they ever let one of us down. They also felt guilty about the possibility of tarnishing their reputation, if they did not do what I asked them to do during a given day.
Monday, November 23, 2015
Friday, November 6, 2015
The point of convergance
I have dealt with two different principals many, many times in my career/life. This concept takes into account a number of previous items I posted on, so I may, at times, allude to or directly point out these facts during this real-life, triangle example. Serving two principals over the course of the past three months took a toll on me, and I'm hopeful I can describe it in all it's glory!
On the first day on the job at Urban and Regional Planning, I became aware of the program's ongoing accreditation renewal. The process began sometime in May, and before I arrived a report had been sent to the Planning Accreditation Board (PAB) and was under review by the Site Team Visit (SVT) in preparation for their visit to our department. My boss told me I would be involved in the process, but since I had just begun, she wasn't sure to what extent. Over the course of the next two months, I quickly became aware that the SVT's visit would lie squarely on my shoulders. I connected with the Executive Director of the PAB and she provided me with a multitude of materials to read in order to plan an excellent visit. On top of this was the Self-Study Report which our department put together and I needed to become aware of, per my boss. At the onset, the reading wasn't difficult and understanding the logistics was something I had been familiar with in a previous position. Very quickly, you will notice that I began receiving information from both sides, PAB and my Department, and each needed tending. I also, filled my plate with new responsibilities in my new role, many of which required in-depth training or simply becoming familiar with office routines.
My boss assigned me the task of assembling the schedule for the team and organizing all meals, travel, and guests (PAB requires the team meet with employers, alumni, current students, faculty, Deans, Provosts, etc.) During the initial planning stages, I prepared a Site Visit in direct accordance of the rules set forth by the manual provided to me by the Executive Director of PAB. My boss told me she was happy with the schedule I had created and I reiterated to her that it checked off all of the bureaucratic boxes required by PAB. With the satisfied schedule in hand I began contacting the groups of guests we would invite for the meetings, as well as faculty with their specific times. I should add here, that I took the liberty to schedule around the faculty teaching schedules and this was appreciated by my boss and she gave me a "pat on the back" for taking this into consideration. Upon receiving confirmations from all attendees, I forwarded the final schedule to the Executive Director of the PAB. Here is where things got hairy...
The Executive Director told me that, while I did a good job scheduling all of the proper meetings, the days were too long for the SVT, and I would need to shave off time, by combining meetings of tenured faculty and shortening a couple of meetings. After following these instructions, I reduced the scheduled work day. Then, I explained to my boss that due to the combined meetings, there would be many faculty who may not be able to attend due to teaching commitments. This was not acceptable to my boss, so I was once again back to the drawing board with my schedule. (After about three iterations like this, the inefficiency became belligerent and I became more frustrated.) Finally, I produced a schedule that was both acceptable to my boss as well as to the PAB, but there was one set of meetings I had yet to confirm: the Interim Provost and the Acting Dean of our College. I wrote to the Assistant of these persons (who, in a way, acts as the head of UEO assistants and in turn, a boss-like figure) and she could not make the appointments happen the way I had scheduled them. I explained this to the Executive Director of PAB and she refused to give me any wiggle room, and yet again, I rearranged the schedule. In the end, I spent hundreds of hours undoing and redoing, and the inefficiencies that arose from such an arrangement, where I had to please both my boss and the PAB, were innumerable.
Conflict presented itself in this situation, but because the Accreditation Board had so much power over the program, we could not very easily go against their wishes, even when their wishes were nearly impossible to grant. Conflict arose among our unit between myself and the UEO, because we did not agree on the best solutions, and conflict also arose between my boss and the PAB team because she felt they were being unreasonable. My boss could not contact the team (due to confidentiality rules) which may have been a good thing since she was so frustrated. But, as I said, this frustration could not be voiced or made obvious by even me, for fear it would affect the outcome of the accreditation review. I would also have to suggest the PAB seemed to be operating opportunistically as they offered no room for compromise. It was "their way or the highway" with total disregard for how it might affect our daily operation schedules.
The last thing I have to say about this situation is that it brought me and my boss closer because she saw how hard I worked to produce an excellent output, and we also learned how to solve problems together. While we operate in a hierarchy type organizational structure, we still learned to problem-solve together and determine the best course of action for responding to the PAB in their requests, even though it was ultimately my responsibility for assembling the schedule and pleasing both principals.
In the end, I'm thrilled our accreditation Site Visit ended Wednesday and that I am relieved of the extreme amount of stress it brought me.
On the first day on the job at Urban and Regional Planning, I became aware of the program's ongoing accreditation renewal. The process began sometime in May, and before I arrived a report had been sent to the Planning Accreditation Board (PAB) and was under review by the Site Team Visit (SVT) in preparation for their visit to our department. My boss told me I would be involved in the process, but since I had just begun, she wasn't sure to what extent. Over the course of the next two months, I quickly became aware that the SVT's visit would lie squarely on my shoulders. I connected with the Executive Director of the PAB and she provided me with a multitude of materials to read in order to plan an excellent visit. On top of this was the Self-Study Report which our department put together and I needed to become aware of, per my boss. At the onset, the reading wasn't difficult and understanding the logistics was something I had been familiar with in a previous position. Very quickly, you will notice that I began receiving information from both sides, PAB and my Department, and each needed tending. I also, filled my plate with new responsibilities in my new role, many of which required in-depth training or simply becoming familiar with office routines.
My boss assigned me the task of assembling the schedule for the team and organizing all meals, travel, and guests (PAB requires the team meet with employers, alumni, current students, faculty, Deans, Provosts, etc.) During the initial planning stages, I prepared a Site Visit in direct accordance of the rules set forth by the manual provided to me by the Executive Director of PAB. My boss told me she was happy with the schedule I had created and I reiterated to her that it checked off all of the bureaucratic boxes required by PAB. With the satisfied schedule in hand I began contacting the groups of guests we would invite for the meetings, as well as faculty with their specific times. I should add here, that I took the liberty to schedule around the faculty teaching schedules and this was appreciated by my boss and she gave me a "pat on the back" for taking this into consideration. Upon receiving confirmations from all attendees, I forwarded the final schedule to the Executive Director of the PAB. Here is where things got hairy...
The Executive Director told me that, while I did a good job scheduling all of the proper meetings, the days were too long for the SVT, and I would need to shave off time, by combining meetings of tenured faculty and shortening a couple of meetings. After following these instructions, I reduced the scheduled work day. Then, I explained to my boss that due to the combined meetings, there would be many faculty who may not be able to attend due to teaching commitments. This was not acceptable to my boss, so I was once again back to the drawing board with my schedule. (After about three iterations like this, the inefficiency became belligerent and I became more frustrated.) Finally, I produced a schedule that was both acceptable to my boss as well as to the PAB, but there was one set of meetings I had yet to confirm: the Interim Provost and the Acting Dean of our College. I wrote to the Assistant of these persons (who, in a way, acts as the head of UEO assistants and in turn, a boss-like figure) and she could not make the appointments happen the way I had scheduled them. I explained this to the Executive Director of PAB and she refused to give me any wiggle room, and yet again, I rearranged the schedule. In the end, I spent hundreds of hours undoing and redoing, and the inefficiencies that arose from such an arrangement, where I had to please both my boss and the PAB, were innumerable.
Conflict presented itself in this situation, but because the Accreditation Board had so much power over the program, we could not very easily go against their wishes, even when their wishes were nearly impossible to grant. Conflict arose among our unit between myself and the UEO, because we did not agree on the best solutions, and conflict also arose between my boss and the PAB team because she felt they were being unreasonable. My boss could not contact the team (due to confidentiality rules) which may have been a good thing since she was so frustrated. But, as I said, this frustration could not be voiced or made obvious by even me, for fear it would affect the outcome of the accreditation review. I would also have to suggest the PAB seemed to be operating opportunistically as they offered no room for compromise. It was "their way or the highway" with total disregard for how it might affect our daily operation schedules.
The last thing I have to say about this situation is that it brought me and my boss closer because she saw how hard I worked to produce an excellent output, and we also learned how to solve problems together. While we operate in a hierarchy type organizational structure, we still learned to problem-solve together and determine the best course of action for responding to the PAB in their requests, even though it was ultimately my responsibility for assembling the schedule and pleasing both principals.
In the end, I'm thrilled our accreditation Site Visit ended Wednesday and that I am relieved of the extreme amount of stress it brought me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)