Tag Archives: disc

Easy Ways to Start Mentoring Program

If there is one aspect of business building that has confounded even the smartest of entrepreneurs, it’s developing the team. The reality is that we simply don’t have the skills to develop their skills, and that can have a long-term and negative impact on the business.

Where Are You Today?

In 2015, we conducted research for the FPA’s Research and Practice Institute and Financial Advisor IQ that focused on team compensation and benefits. As part of that study, we examined team development, and I was impressed to see that almost all respondents support their team members’ personal and professional development, through training, financial support or continuing performance reviews.

At the same time, I noticed that most development initiatives were informal. Although 60% of respondents administer formal performance reviews, development activities such as new-employee training are overwhelmingly informal. The same is true for mentoring.

Have Your Considered Mentoring?

Mentoring is one development option that is generally considered very effective. Like all such development tools, of course, it’s only effective if it’s done well. Remember that mentoring can mean you being a mentor to the team, someone else on your team being a mentor to others or simply helping your team find outside mentors. It isn’t just an option for large businesses.

The reality is that mentoring doesn’t have to be a “time-suck” for you personally, despite its reputation for being exactly that. Today, I want to help you think about taking the first step to understanding where your team needs help and the role that mentoring might play in helping them maximize their potential.

See also: The Keys to Forming Effective Teams  

What Are Your Gaps?

An obvious first step is to figure out what gaps mentoring (or any development activity for that matter) is going to bridge. A performance review process is clearly an important first step. You may opt for a formal tool (such as DiSCPredictive Index or any of a range of tools) or you may opt for a good old-fashioned conversation with a team member.

Whichever approach you take, consider the following in evaluating your team members, ensuring that you cover three potential types of objectives.

1. Performance Objectives

  • Success in meeting specific, measurable objectives based on role
  • Joint accountability: the ability to work well with and support the entire team
  • Attention to detail within sphere of role
  • Timeliness in completing work
  • Initiative: goes above and beyond defined role

2. Competency/Development Objectives

  • Customer service skills
  • Sales
  • Time management
  • Public speaking
  • Business writing
  • Leadership
  • Software skills
  • Graphic design
  • Financial planning

3. Personal Development Objectives

  • Personal improvement goals that the team member sees as important to moving career forward, for example:
  • Professional designations
  • Training courses
  • Advanced Business Training

You might also consider skills assessment tools, which differ substantially from performance review tools.  These tools can be helpful when you are thinking more about getting the right people in the right roles – or who to hire in the first place.

Consider the following:

Kolbe. The Kolbe A Index is designed to measure the conative faculty of the mind — the actions you take that result from your natural instincts. The index validates an individual’s natural talents, the instinctive method of operation (M.O.) that enables you to be productive.

VIA Strengths Test. VIA has identified 24 character strengths that are universal across all aspects of life: work, school, family, friends and community. Whereas most personality assessments focus on negative and neutral traits, the VIA Survey focuses on what is best in you and is at the center of the science of well-being.

Strengths Finder. Based on research from Gallup, you access this assessment by purchasing the book. It’s designed to help uncover your talents and incorporates strategies to leverage the strengths you identify.

Mentoring Options

Mentoring is an option (whether delivered formally or informally, internally or externally) that I believe has a strong potential to have significant impact. Of course, it’s not always easy to get moving.

In an interview with Rebecca Pomering for our Spotlight program, we reviewed the three types of mentoring available at Moss Adams. This is a helpful way to think about what you are trying to accomplish and highlights that mentoring can be more or less involved depending on your needs.

At Moss Adams, Rebecca explained that there were three types of mentoring available:

1. The Buddy

A buddy might be assigned for a new employee. That individual may or may not be involved in the actual job training, but is there to help navigate the office and company. The buddy is someone a new employee can ask any question of and not feel judged in any way.

2. The Mentor

A mentor is more traditionally defined as supporting the team member either on a specific topic or skill or on a longer-term basis. Employees may be asked to identify a mentor or go to management if they are looking for support on a specific issue. On some teams, mentors are assigned, but the jury is out as to whether relationships that are not explicitly chosen are as effective.

3. The Sponsor

A sponsor’s objective is to actively support and promote the individual in career advancement and development. Sponsors are typically individuals who have the political and organizational connections to make that sponsorship effective. Sponsors may or may not be mentors and vice versa.

See also: How to Pick Your Insight Team  

Talk to Your Team (First)

If you’re considering implementing a mentoring program, ensure you start with clear direction from the team on what will work and what won’t. Below are a series of questions that could form the basis of a survey or a conversation:

  • Have you had experience with any form of mentoring? If yes, what form did it take, and how would you describe the impact?
  • Do you think it would be valuable for us to consider implementing a mentoring program, which we’ll jointly define?
  • How do you think a mentor could help you?
  • How would you describe your ideal mentor? What skills, experience or personality traits would he/she have?
  • Specifically, what kinds of issues would you hope to address with a mentor?
  • Would you prefer to be assigned a mentor or to have support/guidance in finding someone yourself?
  • How would you describe the outcomes of a successful mentoring program for you? What would have to happen for you to describe the process as successful?
  • Is there anything that you feel definitely wouldn’t work when it comes to implementing a mentoring system?

Talk to Yourself (Not Literally)

You’ll also want to get clear on your own goals and objectives for providing or facilitating mentoring. To that end, consider the following questions if you are thinking about finding your own mentor. Or, if it’s for your team, ensure both the mentor and mentee clarify exactly what they’re hoping to accomplish and how they know if they’ll be successful.

  • Exactly what are you trying to solve for? Are you looking to develop a specific skill, gain general insights into a specific topic or have someone you can go to for continuing advice?
  • How long do you anticipate the mentoring relationship to last?
  • How often will you meet, where and for what length of time?
  • How will you both prepare for those meetings?
  • How do you define success?

Personally, I consider team development one of the most challenging aspects of running a business. We surround ourselves with these incredibly talented people, and it’s easy to feel like you are letting them down. Ultimately, development is about prioritizing and booking the time to do something, even if that something isn’t perfect.

Thank for stopping by,

Julie

Tips for Bringing Kids Into Your Business

Is your son or daughter your successor? What are some things you and they can do to make this a successful succession? Mistakes to avoid when trying to make your son or daughter your successor? Mistakes they should avoid?

As a succession coach who advises multi-­generational family businesses on how to bring in the next generation, and as a business professional whose daughter has been working with her for nearly 10 years, I can offer a few tips that I have found to be helpful:

  1. While your children are attending high school or completing college, provide work experiences during the summer that allow your children to try out different departments and tasks, working with different managers (best never for you personally).
  2. Develop a family business employment and expectations policy defining requirements for education, professional experience and behavioral and performance expectations. If you are thinking ahead, introduce this to them when they are in high school or college to help give them a sense of how they need to prepare, what they should be studying and what it will take if they are considering a career in the family enterprise. This will create a road map so that your children have an opportunity to succeed.
  3. Before designing a job description or entering into any kind of discussion regarding potential employment in the family enterprise, make sure you spend some time in thoughtful discussion together investigating each other’s vision for the future. You may think you know what your children want to be “when they grow up,” but you may be surprised when you actually inquire.
  4. It can be helpful to engage an experienced coach to conduct the interview, using a personality styles tool (like PDP, DISC or Meyers Briggs) to help frame the conversation related to their natural strengths. Many times, I have found kids feeling like they are being squeezed into their parents’ shoes, and it’s not a good fit. If Dad started the business, is a natural at sales, relationship-building and strategic thinking, and Son is a thoughtful, reserved communicator who is very process- and detail-oriented, I can promise you, it will be a difficult path for the Son to ever live up to his father’s and the company’s expectations. Additionally, he will be miserable.
  5. Once you have identified the ideal career path that excites and suits your son/daughter, bring in your senior management team and discuss what you would like to do with them. Enroll the team in creating the right on-boarding process, job placement and develop agreements for how you expect your children to be managed and mentored. Also, how you will support your managers so they can hold your daughter or son accountable without fear of repercussion.
  6. Lastly, establish a family council to share information with all your children, not just the one or two who are currently showing interest. Let all your children know that there are many ways to participate with the family enterprise. Some may want to be community cheerleaders, helping in events and philanthropic activities, while others may dream of managing a division or eventually becoming your successor. You can achieve succession in a multitude of ways. You don’t have to always create a King of the Mountain, where your children have to vie to take your position upon your retirement.

Working with my daughter, watching her grow, keeping it real has been a great joy. I always, ALWAYS keep the most cherished element of our relationship in mind: She is my daughter. I wish her life to be happy, healthy and fulfilled. If that can happen while she’s working with me, it’s icing on the cake.

A Better Way to Diagnose Back Pain

Neck and back disorders account for an estimated one third of all work-related injuries in the private sector. In only about 5% of all cases is back pain associated with serious underlying pathology requiring diagnostic confirmation and directed treatment, yet magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is, controversially, often used for diagnosis. New technology can specifically diagnose muscle-related back pain and produce better outcomes.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, back pain is the single most common reason Americans seek medical attention, and a U.S. Department of Health study showed that managing this type of health disorder costs $850 billion annually. About 20% to 40% of the working population is estimated to experience back pain at some point, with a recurrence rate of 85%.

The majority of back pain comes from musculoskeletal disorders (MSD), which are treatable through medication and physical therapy. MRI is frequently used to diagnose back pain, yet it is overly sensitive in identifying the cause unless it correlates with an objective clinical exam. European Spine Journal ran an article in February 2012 that found that a considerable number of cases of lumbar disc herniation (HNP) and spinal stenosis that were diagnosed through MRI may have been classified incorrectly. MRI is overly sensitive in exposing structural abnormalities of the spine, but not specific enough to diagnose accurately the cause of the back pain. Even though MRI imaging is commonly used to diagnose the cause of back pain, it is costly, ineffective and contributes to overuse. In fact, lumbar spine scans have risen dramatically in recent years and account for about a third of all MRIs done in some regions, despite the poor correlation between its findings and clinical signs and symptoms.

In addition, there are at least two studies that have been conducted to assess MRI findings in patients without back pain and that have raised concerns. In 2001, Spine published a study of 148 patients; all were asymptomatic, yet an MRI scan showed that 83% had moderate desiccation of one or more discs, that 64% had one or more bulging discs and that 32% had at least one disc protrusion. The second study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1994, found that only 36% of 98 asymptomatic subjects had normal test results from an MRI.

The evidence indicates that it is common for patients who experience back pain to have abnormal MRI scans, regardless of their condition. Spine surgeons, knowing that MRI can be overly sensitive and non-specific in diagnosing back pain, also use discography, a provocative and invasive test, to attempt to accurately pinpoint the cause of pain. In reviewing many studies of this tool, it is clear that even discography can be overly sensitive and often inaccurate in identifying the cause of back pain and in predicting the outcome of surgery. In addition, because it is invasive, discography can actually contribute to further injury in certain patients. Imaging diagnosis for acute back pain often leads to surgery, and complications from unnecessary surgery can prolong back pain or lead to permanent disability.

Because costly imaging studies often fail to produce positive health outcomes for patients with back pain, X-ray, MRI and CT scans should be used primarily for patients with neurogenic disorders or other serious underlying conditions. Because the majority of back pain is musculoskeletal in nature, the primary tools used to diagnose back pain are ineffective.

What is needed is a tool that effectively diagnoses a musculoskeletal disorder. Electrodiagnostic Function Assessment (EFA) is an emerging technology that is a non-invasive and safe diagnostic device registered with the FDA. It can distinguish between spinal, neurogenic and MSD conditions, which can greatly help physicians reach a specific diagnosis. This is especially true in terms of workplace injuries, where MSD conditions are prevalent and difficult to diagnosis and treat, given that the complaints are often subjective.

The following are two case examples where EFA technology, in combination with a neurosurgeon’s evaluation, was used to make accurate diagnosis and treatments:

In the first case, a 34-year-old patient sustained a work-related injury from repetitively using an air-powered grinder. As a result of a court-ordered independent medical exam (IME), the patient went to a neurosurgeon with complaints of bilateral, radiating neck pain and numbness in his right hand. After undergoing an EFA examination, it was found that his resting readings were within normal limits for all muscle groups evaluated. The EFA did indicate non-significant spine and muscular irritation, with chronic muscular weakness. The patient then underwent an MRI, which was abnormal, showing diffuse stenosis but no herniated discs or neural impingement. The IME doctor deemed he was not a surgical candidate and recommended treatment with conservative, site-specific physical therapy and muscle relaxants. The EFA and neurosurgeon prevented unnecessary surgery and were able to help with appropriate care to get this case satisfactorily closed.

The second case involved a 30-year-old mechanic who sustained a work-related injury, straining his neck while opening the hood on a semi. The EFA revealed no muscular irritation, but spinal pathology revealed an issue in the neck area that could be clinically significant. In addition, the EFA findings indicated acute neck pain, increased curving of the spine and loss of range of motion. In this case, the IME neurosurgeon requested an MRI, which confirmed the findings of the EFA examination. The MRI further showed a herniated disc consistent with the patient’s symptoms and exam. The patient failed physical therapy, and appropriate surgery was recommended. The patient underwent surgery and had an excellent outcome.

In both of these cases, the administering physicians were able to make exceedingly accurate diagnoses by having the correct tools available to them. This would not have been possible without the assistance of the EFA. By using the appropriate diagnostic tool, each physician was able to render a more accurate diagnosis and appropriate treatment, which not only assisted the patient but helped to lower healthcare and workers’ compensation costs.

The use of MRI or other imaging technologies alone in diagnosing causes for back pain can be misleading and inaccurate in localizing pain generators. However, a more accurate diagnosis can be made when used in conjunction with the findings of EFA, so that appropriate site-specific treatments can be provided, leading to better patient outcomes and improved healthcare.

The authors invite you to join them at the NexGen Workers’ Compensation Summit 2015, to be held Jan. 13 in Carlsbad, CA. The conference, hosted by Emerge Diagnostics, is dedicated to past lessons from, the current status of and the future for workers’ compensation. The conference is an opportunity for companies to network and learn, as well as contribute personal experience to the general knowledge base for workers’ compensation. Six CEU credits are offered. For more information, click here.

 

Comment from Brent Nelson, Area Medical Director/Medical Director Occupational Medicine AZ at NextCare Urgent Care:

Very interesting article. As a physician treating and managing providers who treat work related injuries, I am often surprised at the number of referrals I see for advance imaging for back/neck pain. I was trained in an industrial athlete model for treating musculoskeletal injuries and one of the key points in the model is that an MRI or other advanced imaging should only be ordered to confirm a diagnosis, not find one. When this method is employed, the use of the imaging is less, and the findings are usually accurate and directly related to the complaint.
When an MRI is ordered simply for back pain that is not responding to treatment as well as expected, and the provider does not have a clear idea of what the problem may be, ambiguous findings may serve only to muddy the waters and increase the cost of treatment and possibly even result in unnecessary procedures. A bulging or ruptured disk without nerve impingement, annular tear, facet arthropathy, etc. are findings that may exist in asymptomatic populations, and may not be the cause of the pain.
A very detailed and thorough examination should always be performed at each visit, and this coupled with a detailed history should lead to an accurate diagnosis.
Quality of physical therapy must also be assessed when patients do not return to baseline as quickly as expected. Is the patient being treated by a physical therapist with experience in sports medicine? These PTs tend to have a better outcome for back and neck pain. Is there an indication for kinesio taping? Would an IFC/stim unit help breach a plateau? These are all considerations in treatment that may help with resolution prior to an MRI.
And again, an MRI should be ordered to confirm a diagnosis, and is most often indicated for a persisting radiculopathy or for an injury that may have resulted in an acute facet injury (not the same as degenerative changes in facet joint).
Simple XRays when conservative treatment begins to fail can give hints as to underlying degenerative issues which mean patient will take a little longer to return to baseline, and help prevent advanced imaging being ordered prematurely.
In short, the physical exam should give a good physician an idea of the problem and advanced imaging ordered only when one wants to confirm a suspected diagnosis.
The importance of knowledgeable physicians and therapists working in collaboration, and involving the carrier during the process, is often overlooked (and often times hard to find). The majority of the time, the patients answers to questions and an appropriate physical exam will give one the answers to the questions about origin of pain and indicated treatment.

tomecek

Breaking Through The Barrier Of Hardnosed Workers, Part 3

Turning The Corner
Admittedly, Part 1 and Part 2 of this series may be a bit discouraging to the solution-seeking reader. But as a wise professor states, “There is no implementation without, first, evaluation.”

So what has our evaluation revealed?

First, the dysfunctional nature of the average hardnosed worker employed in traditionally change-resistant work sectors is representative of his greater employment family, both labor and management. It is not the portrait of an isolated employee or two. The nature is systemic, as are its crippling effects.

Second, the extent of potential behavioral dysfunction in hardnosers is staggering. The research data points past the occasional whimsical, inane antics of the passive-aggressive worker who simply annoys others. It directs us to the darkly devious behavior of someone, or a bevy of someones, who is self-destructive, emotionally unengaged, and constantly looking to jump off the ship after lighting the fuse that may blow it up.

Third, management has largely failed in its attempts to wrestle control of the workforce away from hardnosers. Traditional quick-action employee management strategies lack the foundational understanding of both the cause of defiant behavior and the dysfunctional team dynamics that it creates.

Last, management has often chosen the wrong method to seize control of hardnosers. The preferred tactic has been to tighten control through the repeated issuance of compliance standards. Such “what to do” and “how to do it” standards stiffen the hardnosed worker’s resolve to reject management’s ploys.

Engineering consultant Kevin Sorbello fittingly compares the change-resistant workforce to a dysfunctional family in which “those making the rules unconsciously see themselves as adults in charge of children.” Conversely, he notes that workers of lower rank see themselves as being “treated like children by unfit elitists. The fact that this scenario is so ubiquitous,” he says, “is disheartening.”

In light of this stark portrayal, what can be done to heal a defiant and dysfunctional employment family?

Capitalize On Dysfunction
One word points us down the right path. It keeps cropping up [five times above]. The word is dysfunctional. There’s a reason it is our key word.

Dysfunction brings with it opportunity. The same weaknesses that define dysfunctional workers are the ones that open the door for us to help them personally and to improve the cooperative nature of the entire workforce.

But this can’t happen until we acknowledge several hard-to-believe truths about the nature of hardnosed workers. These are beliefs gleaned by the author after four decades of listening to, observing, profiling, and helping dysfunctional people.

1. Hardnosers really want to improve.
They are really not into self-flagellation, though they expect it to happen (defeatism) — they’d rather have the opposite: success.

2. Hardnosers are stuck and need a push.
They really don’t know how to solve their own problems, nor why they are stuck in a defeatist rut.

3. Hardnosers want simple honesty.
They will not trust you until you first demonstrate to them your complete honesty.

4. Hardnosers desire compassion, not charity.
They innately sense the difference — one is considered condescending and offensive to them; the other is acceptable.

5. Hardnosers respond best to old-fashioned “tough love.”
They desire hard boundaries, particularly those that help them achieve hard-to-reach goals.

6. Hardnosers want you to earnestly listen to them.
They want to tell you vital information about themselves — their real and felt needs — that enables you to help them mature.

It is difficult for some skeptics to embrace these beliefs. It is easier to adopt the attitude of one Cleveland-area business owner who believes that “most employees with bad attitudes come that way and it is not up to you to be a social worker.” To him, any alternative to improving the quality of workers other than perfecting the hiring and firing process is “silly,” even if personnel turnover costs are astronomical.

Safety officer Ken Malcolm at Safety & More P/L begs to differ. He says, “Hardnosed negatives can become hardnosed positives.” The key, he says, is trust.

Malcolm states that trust does not exist because “the past experiences [of workers] have not been good.” He suggests that workers have rarely been exposed to managers “who put value on worker input.” Perhaps they once worked for a grumpy guy in Cleveland. More likely, they’ve been jaded by repeated exposure to the Cycle of Rejection described in Part 2 of this series.

Agree with it or not, the path to profitability involves helping hardnosers cure their dysfunctional behavior, a task that starts with listening to what they say about themselves and about control-minded authorities.

Listening For Needs
Within the well-worn contentious discourse proffered by hardnosers is an easily recognizable admission of their foibles.

  • I have trouble accepting authority of any kind.
  • I am emotionally cold and uncaring.
  • I often say the wrong thing in the wrong way.
  • I don’t trust anyone enough to give them my loyalty (everyone is out to get me).
  • I am not a good team player.

You can also hear their pleas for help.

  • Help us accept authority, not persistently fight back.
  • Help us live emotionally healthy lives, not crawl into an emotional shell.
  • Help us develop better interpersonal skills, not alienate others.
  • Help us bond with each other and the company, not be disloyal.
  • Help us be better team players, not self-interested individuals.

These needs should sound familiar — they directly correspond to the “snapshot” of a hardnosed worker described in Part 1 of this series.

A hardnosed worker is a self-destructive, emotionally self-centered, uncontrollable person who would rather cut-and-run than commit.

From this snapshot, the human needs that it reveals, and the failure of traditional means to change hardnosed behavior, you know that there is only one action plan — one line of attack — that will result in positively changing a resistant workforce into a cooperative one. But, like the hardnosed Cleveland businessman, you might have trouble admitting it.

You have to help them develop the relational skills that they lack.

But don’t let this series tell you the obvious, though it bears repeating. Let the desperate general manager from Part 1 of this series say it. He’s the one who in 1992 initially linked the characteristics of a juvenile delinquent to the antics of his hardnosed employees. The assistance he sought from a troubled youth expert is as difficult as it is simple.

“I simply want you to help my people treat each other as people,” he asked.

He knew the problem pointed to a lack of interpersonal skills. So do you. And so do the perpetrators, who secretly want your help.

But how do you provide assistance without risking further rejection?

Using Safety To Change People
Job safety is the only joint partnership with management to which the hardnoser has ceded a modicum of control and cooperation. It is the only “face saving” venue in which he consents to [non-craft skill] personal development. To him, change for safety’s sake is grudgingly agreeable.

With safety training comes the opportunity to change the hardnoser, if the correct approach is utilized. Felt needs should be front-and-center — the odor of command, control, and compliance should be reduced.

John Bennett, VP of M.C. Dean, urges us to remember that “it is not about the system, regulations, nor policy or procedure. It is all about the people.”

Ill-conceived training strategies in which personal development is added-on to standard compliance training rarely work. Hardnosers are stubborn, not stupid. They can sense a convenient manipulative end run by management. Ever hear them call leadership training “charm school?”

To achieve human change requires a more carefully crafted safety training strategy than most organizations currently employ. Such a strategy demands a more need-sensitive safety management system.

What is recommended here extends beyond simple supplements to standardized compliance training programs. What is needed is a radical redesign of safety thinking in dealing with a sub-culture of resistance.

Above all, one hard-learned lesson about securing cooperation from defiant people must be remembered. You must meet their felt needs before they will fully give you what you want — compliance and control. If safety doesn’t do this, you remain stuck in the sink hole of opposition, forever containing resistance rather than correcting it.

Life Skills Are Felt Needs
A felt need is simply anything people consciously lack and desire. As noted, the hardnoser consciously but quietly desires self-improvement, particularly in life skills.

One example is the need of supervisors to learn practical leadership skills. As new supervisors quickly rise from the lower ranks of organizations, many supervisors suffer from the lack of leadership development inherent in on-the-job training.

Joe Johnson says that new supervisors are likely to be “given a ‘white hat,’ put in charge, and sent out in the organization with instructions to make things happen safely.” But of the leadership creation process, Johnson asks, “What ‘tools’ have these individuals been provided to insure he or she will be a good safety manager?”

In addition to leadership skills, other life skill needs that are likely felt by hardnosers of all ranks include:

  • Interpersonal communication skills (all aspects)
    • Accurate listening skills
    • Accurate shaping of the message to the listener
    • Accurate delivery of the message for acceptance
    • Accurate use of reflective listening, clarification
  • Relationship building
  • Behavioral awareness and pattern recognition
  • Anger management/tolerance/empathy
  • Team building
  • Critical thinking and decision-making
  • Coaching and mentoring

Under the confines of employee development and safety training, we have regrettably postponed meeting these needs until it is too late, after the worker feels under-appreciated. Properly, these are the needs you should start meeting at the beginning of new hire orientation.

What Do I Do?
The practical answer to the initial question — What should I do to change hardnosed workers? — is as basic as it sounds complex.

To change a hardnosed work force, you should implement a hybrid training program that simultaneously combines traditional safety-related training subjects with topics that develop the character of the hardnoser in their expressed area of needs.

The key is seamless simultaneous integration. Safety and human development should be taught at the same time, not as separate courses.

To avoid the Cycle of Rejection discussed in Part 2, the hardnoser must not feel that personal manipulation is the purpose of the training, nor should it be. Yet he should also walk away with a sense of obligation to practice (note: different than “comply with”) what is taught.

To make a life-changing combination of safety and personal development training workable requires two organizational commitments.

1. The organization must improve its quality of training.
A higher level of training is required, as is a better quality instructor skilled in safety, communications and human development. Revised curricula must be employed. Cattle-call training must be replaced with a caring personal attitude.

2. The organization must meld its safety and operation cultures.
A unified work culture is required, one which leaves hardnosers no wiggle room for discarding their training lessons under the excuse of “safety behavior” versus “operational behavior.” Operations cannot be allowed to deprive the hardnoser of training’s human development gains.

John Bennett underscores the mistake of trying to create a safety culture within an existing company culture in order to change people. He states that the tactic “is incongruent with the overall mission of the company.” Bennett suggests that “building upon the existing culture and simply inserting the safety aspect” is a more sensible way to build a unified work force. “Involving people in a sincere way,” he says, “will produce better results than were heretofore imaginable.” The hardnoser agrees wholeheartedly.

The Essentials
For the best results, a hybrid safety training program should immediately focus on the greatest needs of the hardnoser: interpersonal communication skills, emotional openness and honesty, and relational teamwork. All these needs share a common denominator. They point to the hardnoser’s fundamental lack of behavioral understanding.

Rarely are hardnosers properly educated about behavior — they do not bring such knowledge with them to the job. Most struggle with discerning why people do what they do — many ascribe the wrong motive to other’s behavior. It’s easy for hardnosers to fall into the Cycle of Rejection.

As explained in Part 2, answering the why question is vital to securing the hardnoser’s cooperation. If you desire to tear down the walls of resistance in your work force, here’s what you need to know.

  • If you help the hardnoser understand his unique behavior temperament and its affects on him — why he is prone to repeat certain behavior patterns — he will call you a friend.
  • If you show him why others act as they do because of their unique behavior temperaments, he will call you a good friend.
  • If you teach him how to build productive relationships with others despite their differences in temperament, he will call you his best buddy.
  • If you do none of the above yet try to change him, he will think you are simply attempting to control him. We’ve seen where that leads.

It is essential to integrate a simple behavior paradigm into every aspect of safety training. Uncomplicated behavior assessment profiles like the DISC or the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® can serve this purpose. These are accurate, easily integrated “tools” that produce the type of behavioral understanding needed by hardnosers and non-hardnosers alike.

But this is no shill for the traditional haphazard use of behavior profile tools to soothe the ruffles of an agitated work force or as a guest speaker’s play toy. This is a call to deeply interweave two narratives — safety management and human development — on a consistent basis to meet the targeted needs of employees.

This author will attest to the instant magic brought by behavioral self-discovery through platforms like the DISC or MBTI. One unforgettable incident occurred when the cigar-chomping director of one company’s division first saw the results of his DISC self-analysis. The director’s cigar dropped from his mouth as he stood up, staggered about the training room with his analysis, and shouted, “This is me! This is me! This is freakin’ me.” Presto.

But that momentary magic is useless unless it is converted into tangible results while sustained within a framework of a safety training program that is designed to simultaneously control and change lives.

To do this requires a bold commitment from executive managers that are tired of butting their heads against behavioral barriers. Let the general manager mentioned in Part 1 remind us again that the alternative, letting hardnosers drag the company down, is “not an option.”

What this commitment looks like in practicality, and the results that it can accomplish, will be the subject of Part 4 of this series.

Bibliography

“Focus On Teamwork, Attitude Improves Quality And Safety.” The Waterways Journal. April 25, 1994: 41-44

Newton, Ron. No Jerks On The Job. Irving, TX. PenlandScott Publishers, 2010.

Riddle, Glenden P. An Evaluation Of The Effectiveness Of Stress Camping Through The Use Of The Taylor-Johnson Temperament Analysis Exam. Research Project. Dallas Theological Seminary, December 1978.

Taylor, Robert. Taylor-Johnson Temperament Analysis Manual. Thousand Oaks: Psychological Publications, Inc., 1992.