Being a Good Former Employee I am not going anywhere. If I tried to leave my job, particularly right now, I can think of a dozen people who would hunt me down and bring me back. So don’t take this as some kind of broad hint. I just thought about the issue of being the former employee because I had a very funny dream two nights ago where I went back to visit where I had worked at and was scolded by a former boss (who I happen to like a lot) because I was late to an event where they all dressed up in Revolutionary War costumes (go figure, it’s a dream, o.k.?). Jo, I’m sorry, next time I won’t be tardy!
I’ve been a former employee a few times, and I have plenty of experience with former employees as well. The more closely entwined you were with the operation, the harder it can be to change roles.
One new complication is that in our ever-connected, always-on world, moving on can be much more difficult. In the old days, you got in your car and drove out of the parking lot, and that, for the most part, was it. (Though even in Olde Tymes, not everyone excelled at being a former employee, as I illustrate below.) But now people who were in our lives before are just an email away (just as they were when you worked there). The former place of work is often visible right there on the Web, with frequent updates about new projects and activities. An instant message shimmers on your computer screen, and in the moment, it can be hard to remember that you aren’t back in your old office, your old role, your old job.
Leaving is no longer just a physical act, a car door slamming and a wave good-bye; now it’s a commitment to shift your role to that of the former employee. You have to be intentional. It’s possible that’s really easy for you; but at least one of these tips might resonate.
(I am only tangentially addressing the complexities of moving from a last job into retirement. We had a former editor at MPOW who did it all just right and moved on with a well-thought-out plan for her new role . She continues to be my role model. But that’s a post for another day.)
So, Michael-Stephens-style, here’s my top ten list for former employees (or about-to-be-former-employees):
1. No matter how you feel, go to the going-away party, say gracious things, and squeal over the presents. You will appreciate how cleansing this is. (Actually, I adore parties and presents under any circumstances, and have many fond memories, so definitely don’t take this point as a roman a clef. But I do speak from first-hand knowledge.)
2. Make amends before you leave with anyone you were on the outs with. For rationale, see #1. This, I have had to do, and it was good.
3. Do not breeze out of there with the cop-out, “Questions? Just call me!” Act as if you were traveling to another planet and would be unavailable for oh, say, a few million years; make it hard for them to need to call you for information. Document everything you do that isn’t obvious, including all your passwords and usernames, expiration dates, renewal notices, etc. Put it in a folder or binder or something else unavoidable. They may not use it (one former place didn’t open the binder for several months, until after emailing me they realized it really did have information they needed). Nevertheless, it’s the right thing to do.
4. Clean your office. Take everything that’s yours.
5. Return anything that’s theirs.
6. Be sure to say goodbye to the people who made a difference: the accountant. The mailroom team. The UPS man who left little gifts at the holidays. The volunteer who showed up even on days like Christmas Eve and the Friday of a holiday weekend. The very young page who quietly showed up on time, shelved the books, and didn’t make a fuss.
7. Remember you don’t work there any more. (This is a particular sticking point with some former bosses.
In talking to other managers, I have detected a pattern, rare but real, of “About Schmidt” behavior, where staff have to tiptoe around former bosses who do not quite grasp the “former” part of their new status.) If you still live in the area, avoid “just stopping in,” at least for a while. (And if you think you can’t, interrogate your motives.) Even if you have plenty of time on your hands, don’t offer to volunteer; it might be hard to say no to you, and your motives may be more complicated than you realize.
8. Watch your social interactions very carefully. Think before socializing with former employees. Likewise, if you were in a significant role and you are suddenly befriended by an employee from the former library, think through what’s going on. It could just mean that a former employee wanted to socialize with you and didn’t feel free to do so before, which is a benefit of moving on, but it might not be motive-free. Be careful about “casual” email exchanges, which might not be as casual as they appear. Above all, bells should go off if you are approached by staff asking you to offer your opinion on a workplace issue.
9. Refrain from criticizing changes that take place, even if you vehemently disagree with these changes, even if these were changes you fought off for years. That means don’t complain publicly, don’t complain to former staff, and don’t complain to the former employer. You can write that long, excoriating email full of juicy bon mots about all the mistakes made in the current regime, but delete it before you send it. Then move on. If you find it hard to let go, remember that great line from Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore: “Don’t look back, or you’ll turn into a pillar of s–t.”
10. Every once in a while, check in to say you miss people, that the place looks great, that the new whatsis service is inspired, that you remember the good times, that you learned a lot and took what you learned to your new job or into retirement. If you’ve been a good former employer, they will be glad to hear from you, and you’ll feel good, too.
Truth For Life My Interests | All > Broadcasts > Interests: Daily -- Return to Top -- Daily Add to My Interests
Daily Broadcast Weekend Broadcast Extras Title: Do What It Says! Part B James 1:22-25
Series: Faith That Works more about this series >
by Alistair Begg | Wednesday, September 24, 2008 Listen Now:
Listen in Mini-Player If you think that the law in the Bible is just a code of “do’s and don’ts” that we’re supposed to follow in order to live a better life, then think again. The book of James talks about the “perfect law” and about its benefits. Could you be missing out? Find out when you tune in for Truth For Life with Alistair Begg.
Recent Broadcasts Religion, Part Two, A Friday, September 26, 2008 James 1:27, Series: Faith That Works
Religion, Part One Thursday, September 25, 2008 James 1:22-25, Series: Faith That Works
Do What It Says! Part B Wednesday, September 24, 2008 James 1:22-25, Series: Faith That Works
Do What It Says! Part A Tuesday, September 23, 2008 James 1:22-25, Series: Faith That Works
Don't Kid Yourselves Monday, September 22, 2008 James 1:22, Series: Faith That Works
Sexton v. Thermotron Industries, Inc., No. 130849 (Mich. Ct. App. 1992) (unpublished opinion) ($200,000 jury verdict for breach of contract under Michigan law reversed), leave to appeal denied, 442 Mich. 885, 502 N.W.2d 39 (Mich. S. Ct. 1993)
January 7, 2008 Florida Non-Compete Agreements
Often after leaving your job your previous employer will try to hold you to the terms of a non-compete or non-solicitation agreement. An important part of determining the enforceability of the agreement is whether you can afford to defend a suit by the employer. Although many non-compete agreements are not enforceable as written, courts will see if there is a way to reduce the scope by limiting the time, range of activities restricted, or the geographic restrictions if there is a legitimate business interest that the business is trying to protect.
There are many defenses to non-compete agreements and if you are willing to fight there is a chance you can settle or will a case. The best defense is to review and structure your agreement prior to executing it. It is important to have your agreement reviewed by a Florida Non-compete Attorney or a Florida Non-solicition Lawyer to determine what your chances of prevailing are.
Posted by David M. Goldman | Permalink | Email This Post
What is the original sourse of the phrase "Can I get a witness"?
Is it IN the Bible?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Request for Question Clarification by tutuzdad-ga on 10 Mar 2006 14:02 PST As some of the comments suggest, I managed to find an early reference to the phrase
Can I get a witness?
which probably has its origin in the African American Christian church.
Nannie Helen Burroughs, who lived from 1879 to 1961, was an historical figure in Black American Culture.
In this excerpt from the cultural study entitled
A CULTURAL CASE ANALYSIS OF THE WORKS OF NANNIE HELEN BURROUGHS?
the author describes a customary service that dates back to 19th Century church tradition:
Witnessing, within the Black religious tradition,
indicated a fulfillment of an expectation of God-intervention in everyday life (Ross, 1989).
In addition to anticipation of divine presence in everyday living, witnessing also involves an affirmation of understanding among Black women, as a collective group, that God had and would work in the lives of church women.
On a community level inreligious services, church members may take time to give a testimony of how God has moved in their lives. Then, after telling their story, the speaker engages the audience by stating,
Can I get a witness?
Within this context, the speaker is asking if anyone has experienced the move of divine intervention similar to her own experiences.
In turn, members within the audience express affirmation through hand clapping and shout of "Amen!"
Nowhere to Hide: the Challenge of Managing Corporate Ethics.
By Frank Vogl, President, Vogl Communications, Inc.
Address to Valmont Industries Accounting & Finance Seminar Valmont Industries, Inc., Omaha, Nebraska. May 15, 2005. Introduction
Corporate scandals have diminished public confidence in the leadership of American business. More investigations and scandals are probable and they may lead to still more public anger and more pressure on politicians and regulators to respond. The first round of scandals saw Congress pass the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Since then we have learned about fraud and malfeasance in the mutual fund and insurance sectors and in a host of major corporations.
There is a grave danger that the politicians will continue to believe that they can legislate ethics. The danger is to our economic system. More official regulation will threaten the vibrancy of enterprise, undermine our free market’s creativity and flexibility and damage our economic prospects. It is urgent that business demonstrates that it recognizes these dangers, that it understands the need to restore public trust through its own voluntary actions.
Why has this crisis been so large and embraced so many corporations? There are many explanations, but an important one relates to technology. Embarrassing e-mails at Boeing, Enron, Merrill Lynch, Credit Swiss, Morgan Stanley and scores of other enterprises have shown how greed triumphed over sound ethics. The hard-drives of corporate computers are revealing secrets that are exposing myriad unethical practices. In this era of an aggressive Securities and Exchange Commission, Elliot Spitzer, the Internet and a media fascinated by business scandals, the corporations of America have nowhere to hide.
Thanks to the Internet the ability of corporations to keep information confidential is declining fast. Meanwhile, the scale of false information about corporations that appears on the web is multiplying. As we look ahead we must come to terms with four considerations:
1. The amount of information available in the public domain about every aspect of a publicly quoted corporation’s business will rise.
2. The number of investigations into corporate wrong-doing will increase.
3. The sophistication of pressure groups seeking to force corporations to reform will grow.
4. And, these forces will compel business to recognize that when there is nowhere to hide, then there is no choice other than to confront the wrongdoing in its midst and institute reforms consistent with this age of transparency.
Modeling Behavior: The Ripple Effect of Performance Management September 2006 - Sam S. Adkins Email This Article To A Friend - Print This Article
Gandhi is reported to have once said, “You must be the change you want to see in the world.” Performance management professionals would put it this way: “You must model the behavior you want to see in the organization.”
The concept of behavior modeling has been part of the workforce performance profession for more than 10 years.
In that time, practitioners have collected a wealth of data to prove that performance management based on behavior modeling has a variety of ripple effects, including increased productivity, increased customer satisfaction, better business alignment, increased regulatory compliance, increased human safety and higher morale.
The Ripple Begins at the Top
Our culture is permeated with sayings such as “The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree” and “It starts at the top.” The culture at large seems to be in consensus that authority-figure role models have a significant impact on the behavior of subordinates. This belief is very strong in the corporate world, and extensive data suggest that the behavior of executives has a profound effect on the behavior of the workforce.
Human resource departments apply performance management methods and technology to align the workforce with organizational goals. Their efforts can be very effective when the executive leadership provides a positive role model, or they can be seriously hobbled by poor role models at the top. HR professionals and organizational development professionals have long been aware of the detrimental ripple effect of senior executives saying one thing but doing another.
In an article for Salary.com, “Seven Essentials for Effective Performance Management,” Bill Coleman wrote, “Performance management starts with the CEO doing a good job with the top tier of executives. It will cascade very naturally from there. It will fail for certain if performance management is deemed to be good for the masses but unnecessary for top management.”
Even investment bankers are aware of this and will make investment decisions based on the behavior of executives. Guy Kawasaki, managing director of Garage Technology Ventures, wrote a blog entry in April called “The Art of Customer Service” in which he said, “The CEO’s attitude toward customer service is the primary determinant of the quality of service that a company delivers.” The impact of the behavior of supervisors on the workforce has been extensively studied in public safety organizations.
“As an employee’s most influential role model, it is the direct supervisor who most shapes and molds the beliefs and attitudes of the workforce. The long-lasting effect of what an integrity-filled leader says and does is astounding,” wrote Neal Trautman in his 2004 article “Bad Leadership Role Models and Officer Misconduct.”
Although most performance-management professionals would agree that the example set by executives is very important, new data suggest the behavior of anyone in the organization can have a ripple effect.
The Ripple Can Come from the Bottom if the Organization Allows It
There is new research on the impact of behavior modeling from “below” in so-called bottom-up change-management processes. The data strongly suggest individuals who engage in positive and productive behavior have an impact on peers, supervisors and organizations. This traditionally has been called empowerment.
In 2003’s “Behavioral Coaching,” Suzanne Skiffington and Perry Zeus wrote, “Unleashing the full power of an organization starts with the individual. With behavioral-based coaching, the individual can be shown how to self-manage himself and significantly upgrade his personal and professional skill sets, feel balanced, alert, in control and powerful, and be able to make the greatest contribution to the organization.”
The recent phenomenon of corporate blogging provides ample evidence that the behavior of individuals can have a significant ripple effect on peers and the organization. This is a new type of bottom-up role modeling and has a striking likeness to the organizational practice of storytelling that human-performance professionals advocate.
Perhaps the best-known corporate blogger is Robert Scoble, who until he recently joined a new company, was the unofficial voice of Microsoft. His willingness to openly criticize the company and discuss its shortcomings in the public domain was a role model for other corporate bloggers. The company’s executive leadership publicly endorsed Scoble’s behavior. This endorsement set a positive example for the organization and has had a positive effect on Microsoft’s culture—employees now feel empowered to discuss issues openly, inside and outside the company.
But high-profile bloggers are just the tip of the iceberg. Many firms now have corporate bloggers who focus the content of their blogs on their area of expertise or specific products.
Technology firms in particular—such as Google, IBM, Oracle, Microsoft and Novell—encourage their IT professionals to blog about the products on which they work. This often sparks heated debates with competitors, industry peers and customers, and the companies learn a great deal from this dialogue.
Yet many organizations still send a tacit message that bottom-up role models are not welcome. It is not uncommon for corporate bloggers to be reprimanded—or more rarely, even fired—for the comments they post on their blogs.
The real message being sent to bloggers by this reaction is that open dialogue is threatening to the executive leadership, and it indicates a deep need to control communication and to stifle candid comments. This kind of executive behavior is often found in companies that have something to hide.
It is not surprising that the recent securities-compliance laws make it mandatory to disclose any event that has a material impact on the company. As the old seat belt signs used to say, “It’s not just a good idea, it’s the law.”
When Behavior Models Go Bad
Recent high-profile court cases dealing with corporate fraud have brought the issue of ethics to the forefront of organizational behavior. Unethical behavior can ripple through an organization, and as the headlines will testify, it also can destroy large global companies.
Preventing this negative ripple effect starts with modeling ethical behavior across the organization. If an organization has leaders who say one thing about ethics standards but behave contrary to them, there is a good chance that efforts to encourage ethical behavior will fail.
The 2005 global survey called “The Ethical Enterprise” commissioned by the American Management Association (AMA) and conducted by the Human Resource Institute (HRI) identified several ways that companies can encourage ethical behavior.
These include “leadership support and modeling of ethical behavior, consistent communications from all leaders, integrating ethics into goals, processes and strategies, and making ethics a part of performance management systems and a part of the recruitment and employee-selection process.”
The survey also found the most important ethical leadership behaviors are keeping promises and encouraging open communication. The study concluded by saying, “In summary, employees need to have a code to set the ethics foundation, training to help people truly understand it, and programs that permit them to inquire about and report ethical violations.”
In fact, many corporate ethics experts agree that if companies are serious about modeling ethical behavior, they must have a mechanism that allows people to report unethical behavior. This is often implemented by creating ombudsman programs and establishing methods to allow employees to remain anonymous if they are afraid to identify themselves.
Emotional Behavior Ripples Too
Information must flow freely in an organization before the ripple effect of performance management can take place. In 2002’s “Primal Leadership,” Daniel Goleman, Richard Boyatzis and Annie McKee wrote, “Even when a boss doesn't intend to quash dissent, subtle signals—a sour expression, a curt response—can broadcast the message that bad news isn’t welcome.”
Goleman was the researcher and writer who introduced the concept of emotional intelligence to the performance management profession. He believes the emotional behavior of executives and individuals has a ripple effect on the organization, and he calls this the “emotional climate” of the company.
His research suggests that the behavior of leaders is responsible for at least 70 percent of the emotional climate of a company, and this in turn drives 20 percent to 30 percent of the organization’s business performance.
The research of performance management experts David Sirota, Louis A. Mischkind and Michael Irwin Meltzer yielded similar findings. The researchers indicate that when companies create conditions based on positive behavior, they can reduce employee turnover by as much as 80 percent and can improve workforce performance by as much as 25 percent. One of the major symptoms of an unhealthy emotional climate is a high rate of employee turnover—people simply will not stay in an environment that is threatening or intimidating.
In a 2006 speech, Colin Powell said, “Leadership is all about people and getting the most out of people. It is about conveying a sense of purpose in a selfless manner and creating conditions of trust while displaying moral and physical courage. Never show fear or anger. You have to have a sense of optimism.”
Strategic Thinking Ripples the Farthest
The 2006 Accenture High Performance Workforce Study identified a group of companies called human-performance leaders. The thing they all have in common is effective HR and training departments that model positive behavior in their performance management efforts. According to the study, these human-performance leaders take a strategic approach to performance management. These human-performance leaders view human resources, training and executive leadership as equal partners in the efforts to model organizational behavior.
Peter Cheese, managing partner of Accenture's human performance practice, said, “Some companies focus well on one or two aspects of human capital management such as learning or internal communications, but the best take a broad view of managing their workforce. These are the companies that vastly increase their chances of being industry leaders.”
In contrast, compared with these leaders, the study found that companies that did not take a strategic approach to performance management had a very poor track record of acquiring new customers, developing talented leaders or retaining skilled employees.
Management consultants and executive coaches like to tell the story about the military officer who needed change for a vending machine. He casually asked a nearby soldier whether he had change for a dollar and the soldier said cheerfully, “Yeah, I am pretty sure I do, let me check.” The officer bristled and yelled, “Soldier, you don’t speak to an officer that way. Now let’s start over. Do have change for a dollar, soldier?” The soldier snapped to attention, saluted and shouted, "No, sir!”
The moral to this story is that it is a mistake to assume rank equals leadership—they are not necessarily the same thing. In a 2005 article, “If They Understand, They Will Do,” Marshall Goldsmith wrote, “Our greatest challenge as leaders is not understanding the practice of leadership; it is practicing our understanding of leadership.”
Modeling, Managing, Measuring and Modifying Behavior: Continuous Ripple Effect
The defining characteristic of traditional performance management is the integration of individual and organizational behavior models. New multidimensional performance management integrates two additional behavior models: operational performance models, also known as key performance indicators (KPIs), and customer-user behavior models. These integrated individual, organizational, operational and customer behavior models are the foundation of new, sophisticated, multidimensional performance-support systems.
There are now dozens of sophisticated business process management (BPM), business performance and business intelligence (BI) tools that enable multidimensional behavior modeling. Business intelligence and business activity monitoring (BAM) technology was originally designed to analyze customer behavior, but it is now being used to model employee behavior, as well. Professionals now have a wide range of tools at their disposal.
There are four major categories of enterprise technology that performance experts use to harvest behavior models: resource management, collaboration management, process management and product management. These categories map neatly with the four components of the Balanced Scorecard System, the four phases of the new process-centric ISO 9001:2000 and several variations of Six Sigma.
Modeling Behavior: Resource management systems include applications such as performance management systems and ERP platforms designed to create inventory maps of tangible assets and resources. The resources include people, property, systems and data (such as performance-support content). Behavior models such as job roles and objectives, competency models and maps, personality maps, identity maps and expertise maps can be harvested from this technology category. These are the traditional performance-support materials developed by human resource and training professionals.
Managing Behavior: Collaboration-management technology analyzes the behavior patterns in structured events, work relationships, informal learning and work experiences. This is increasingly moving toward real-time experiences enabled by instant messaging and presence technology. Behavior models such as instant messaging patterns, Web conferencing logs, relationship maps, social-network-analysis maps, and content patterns from blogs and wikis are harvested from this category. The models derived from this category tend to be bottom-up, in that they originate from individuals, and the effects ripple throughout the organization.
Measuring Behavior: Process-management technology is characterized by analytical functions that calibrate and evaluate individual and organizational behavior indices. Productivity metrics, supply-chain behavior models, KPIs and performance gap maps are the behavior models harvested from this category. The professionals who model behavior using these metrics are usually business-process analysts and organizational-performance professionals. This tends to be a top-down form of performance-support development.
Modifying Behavior: Product life-cycle-management technology maps the behavior among employees, products and customers. When these models are harvested for performance support, the ripple effect produces the greatest innovation in an organization. Behavior models include customer behavior personas, knowledge-based support, best practices, product-support trends, quality and defect maps and customer feedback trends. Interestingly, the ripple effect is not being generated inside the organization but from the outside.
These multidimensional ripple effects challenge the traditional notion that performance support must be either bottom-up or top-down. The ripple effect of performance management is continuous performance improvement.
Psalm 1 BOOK I : Psalms 1-41 1 Blessed is the man who does not walk with thermotron's counsel of the wicked or stand in the way of thermotron sinners or sit in the management seat of thermotron's mockers.
2 But his delight is in the law of YAWAH LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night.
3 He is like a tree planted by streams of water, which yields its fruit in season and whose leaf does not wither. Whatever he does prospers.
5 let the wise listen and add to their learning, and let the discerning get guidance-
6 for understanding proverbs and parables, the sayings and riddles of the wise.
7 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools [a] despise wisdom and discipline.
>
4 Not so with thermotron's wicked! They are like chaff that the wind blows away. (where is roger cannary or dave waterfield?)
5 Therefore thermotron's wicked will not stand in the judgment, nor thermotron sinners in the assembly of the righteous.
6 For the LORD YAWAH watches over the way of the righteous, but the way of thermotron's wicked will perish.
9I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people—
10not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world.
11But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a
Holland Michigan Christian brother
but is (really a thermotron whore)
sexually immoral or
greedy,
an idolater
or a slanderer,
a drunkard
or a swindler.
With such a man
do not even eat
.
Doctrine determines much.
A modest and gentle liar is a great place to find evil.
Hypocrisy is a good place to find a liar, or a deceptive and evil person.
There is a difference between a good old fashioned "just human" hypocrite and a deceptive and evil person.
"A wolf in sheeps clothing." That is a danger to be exposed.
A pedophile and pederast can be the nicest person you've ever met, until you talk to his (or her) victims.
Words can mask true nature.
Hypocrisy can indeed show us a person's true nature.
That indeed was a major theme to Jesus exposing hypocrisy. "You are sons of your father the Devil . . ."
That is a very clear nature of some hypocrites and their true nature o be dealt with. And Jesus also talked to and about human nature hypocrites (the woman at the well).
Hypocrisy is no light matter. It can be "just" a human nature faux paus . . . but it can also be pure and absolute evil.
Jesus knew that and preached and taught a lot on the very important subject. A lot of parables dealt with hypocracy.
Many reading my reponses would certainly label me a theological attack-dog (and why of course, I have such opposition to my opinions).
But I ask: "How can a person oppose liars and lies nicely?"
Authority that can not command respect by leadership dynamic or credentials or expertise often shifts to authoritarianism out of a "fear of being found out"
Where abilities are lacking, insecurities evident in relationships to that, and the complexities of the organizational function too difficult to cope with,
the leader often will resort to authoritarian postures in order to save what he can.
Because for him to admit to limitations or incapacities for "corporate' problems is but to contradict the image.
The shape of an organization is a direct result of the administrative weaknesss or strengths that were brought into it,
GOD will not perfect that which has been ignored, especially when the cure is readily accessible at the local business college.
On top of that of course is the already defined authoritarian syndrome which becomes more and more rigid as the ability to cope with corporation complexities becomes less and less.
Weakness of rank and fine can be worked out and perfected but only as there is capable leadership knowledge enough and self-experiential enough to detect them.
In an organization if you ask people how the company values them, most workers will comment along this general line:
"It's a job." or "i don't think I'm really that important".
All of which says that they have learned to accommodate themselves to their "value" as set by the company, or director, either directly or indirectly, which is that they are merely piece workers hung together on restrictive codes.
If mediocrity is to be explained at all it has to stem from the empty "value system" of taboos and internal behavioral circumspections.
An organization whose "value system" spins around negatives will find the group spitting into the the wind rather than with it.
