<<.... So let me reinforce your points which you made so well.
People respect those that have "been there" and will put out
when they respect their leaders. Leaders that do not know "their"
business develop a rift in spite of all the efforts.
<< An interesting epilog [to the story (unquoted)] developed.
I left after my project was done and
they brought in an old guard manager as VP. Service gradually eroded
to the point were the CEO called me back for remedial repairs. The
first week I was back, service was back to normal and I went down to
thank some of my friends. I joked to the CEO that he had made the right
decision when the first month was perfect, then the second and on for
the whole 9 month assignment. These people were subconsciously not
caring about service because they felt uncared for. When I returned,
they returned to their superior behaviour.
As part of this assignment, I insisted on having the scope of effort
include recruiting my successor. He was picked for his "hands-on"
style, and service has remained steady ever since.
A lesson in human "chemistry". >>
Keith,
That's a great story! It's about "the little things", as your original post
was labelled, but I'm putting my comment under "Stories" because I think it
has a powerful ending.
There's a nice contrast in your story between your "hands-on" approach and
the approach of your successor, and you connected the different approaches to
different effects on the workforce. However, you even went beyond this and
gave us a creative solution to the problem - seeing influencing the choice of
successor as part of your original job. Going that extra step I think is
what makes your story great, and it might be an element of other "good"
stories.
-Jeff (BrooksJeff@AOL.com)
--Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>