At some point in there lives, almost everyone faces career reversals, and some of the most famous and successful business leaders have been fired. I’m sure that there were good reasons why it happened from the company’s perspective, and whether you thought that it was the right decision wasn’t going to change their decision; life is not always fair. Your success after a career reversal depends on your resilience and what you do after losing your job. It’s happened to me and I was devastated when it did, but I learnt a few things from it.
Forget about Shame
It’s natural to feel embarrassed when you get fired, and to withdraw and not tell people what happened. Bad move. First of all, if you don’t tell your version of what happened, others probably will – and seldom to your benefit. Second, if you feel ashamed, you are unlikely to present yourself to others with much confidence, and this absence of confidence will make landing your next position more difficult. And third, it will affect your “social influence.” People look to others to figure out how to interpret and react to ambiguous social situations. If you’re embarrassed, that feeling will emanate from you either in your voice, your language or your behaviour. People will suspect that if you’re ashamed, maybe you have something to be ashamed about, in which case they might not offer you the support that you need.
Tell Your Story
On the other hand, openly telling others what happened conveys that it is not such a big deal and that rather than being ashamed, it is the boss and organisation that fired you that maybe ought to feel badly. By admitting what happened, you can ask for help and convey that you’re going to be successful again. Others will rally to your side because people love to associate with success and they particularly enjoy associating with successful people who have surmounted adversity.
Not everyone who is fired will land a good job instantaneously. But your chances of bouncing back quickly are greatly enhanced by conveying to others that the loss of your position was the company’s mistake, not yours, and emotionally relieving yourself of guilt and shame so you can strategically and confidently go about continuing to build your career.
I was given this advice when it happened to me many many years ago and it is difficult advice to follow, but in many instances, will lead to a much better result and more importantly a boost to your own self confidence.
Thursday 19 May 2011
Thursday 12 May 2011
Multitasking
It’s a never ending paper trail, when a report or study comes out, somebody at a reputable publication picks it up, and the next thing you know, generalisations that were never intended by the researchers are plastered all over the internet.
That’s exactly what’s happened recently with multitasking.
Just check out some of these headlines: How and Why to Stop Multitasking, The Myth of Multitasking, The Backlash Against Multitasking, How to Kick the Multitasking Addiction, Multitasking Produces an Illusion of Competence … these are real and are everywhere!
The problem is that most of that “multitasking is evil” stuff is more or less irrelevant. Yes, you’ll perform better giving one thing your undivided attention. Sure, if you text or email during a meeting, you’ll miss some things.
The truth is that, when you define multitasking in the way virtually all professionals, managers, business leaders, and executives do it, and look at its overall effectiveness for a management system or organization as a whole - instead of at the task level - you find that it’s indeed critical to management effectiveness. It’s a no-brainer.
So, to unravel the quagmire of misconceptions, misinformation, and confusion and set the record straight, here are a few alternative thoughts:
• Yes, single task performance deteriorates when you’re distracted. People perform better doing one task at a time. Anybody who thinks that’s an epiphany shouldn’t be responsible for anything let alone managing others.
• Interrupting what you’re doing to constantly check email isn’t multitasking, it’s distraction, plain and simple. Employees or managers who call that multitasking are just trying to make themselves look better in spite of their complete lack of discipline and inability to focus.
• There is no such thing as doing more than one thing simultaneously. It can’t happen in the physical world. Nobody can do it. Not even computers. There are laws of physics that frown upon that sort of thing.
• In the real management world, the only definition of multitasking that matters is the concept of switching between tasks or interrupting one task in favour of another. It’s how we prioritise functions and tasks in real-time. It’s necessary and critical to the performance of any management or organisational system.
• Indeed, on a task by task basis, multitasking is not a benefit. And yes, it is more stressful than not multitasking. That said, it’s a daily part of business life. Things happen. Priorities change. Something crops up that is more important than what you’re working on. The task at hand will suffer, but your overall management effectiveness will benefit. Real-time flexibility - interruption and prioritisation - is critical in management systems.
• Information or communication overload and multitasking are two completely different things. McKinsey wrote a report about information overload that says, “Always-on, multitasking work environments are killing productivity, dampening creativity, and making us unhappy.” The problem is that, by lumping communication overload - a bad thing - in with management multitasking - a good thing - McKinsey is confusing people.
• If you email or text while you’re in a meeting, you can’t possibly be paying attention. Things have to be repeated and that wastes everybody’s time.
• Likewise, when you’re meeting one-on-one or in a small group, you should give them your undivided attention. Not only is that more efficient for everyone, it’s called treating people with respect.
The truth of the matter is that Doctors, chefs, engineers, project managers, marketers, salespeople, line managers, executives, small business owners - anyone with decision-making, managing, or leadership in their job description needs to multitask. It comes with the territory. It’s part of business and management life. Don’t confuse it with single-task performance, communication overload, or distraction and lack of concentration.
That’s exactly what’s happened recently with multitasking.
Just check out some of these headlines: How and Why to Stop Multitasking, The Myth of Multitasking, The Backlash Against Multitasking, How to Kick the Multitasking Addiction, Multitasking Produces an Illusion of Competence … these are real and are everywhere!
The problem is that most of that “multitasking is evil” stuff is more or less irrelevant. Yes, you’ll perform better giving one thing your undivided attention. Sure, if you text or email during a meeting, you’ll miss some things.
The truth is that, when you define multitasking in the way virtually all professionals, managers, business leaders, and executives do it, and look at its overall effectiveness for a management system or organization as a whole - instead of at the task level - you find that it’s indeed critical to management effectiveness. It’s a no-brainer.
So, to unravel the quagmire of misconceptions, misinformation, and confusion and set the record straight, here are a few alternative thoughts:
• Yes, single task performance deteriorates when you’re distracted. People perform better doing one task at a time. Anybody who thinks that’s an epiphany shouldn’t be responsible for anything let alone managing others.
• Interrupting what you’re doing to constantly check email isn’t multitasking, it’s distraction, plain and simple. Employees or managers who call that multitasking are just trying to make themselves look better in spite of their complete lack of discipline and inability to focus.
• There is no such thing as doing more than one thing simultaneously. It can’t happen in the physical world. Nobody can do it. Not even computers. There are laws of physics that frown upon that sort of thing.
• In the real management world, the only definition of multitasking that matters is the concept of switching between tasks or interrupting one task in favour of another. It’s how we prioritise functions and tasks in real-time. It’s necessary and critical to the performance of any management or organisational system.
• Indeed, on a task by task basis, multitasking is not a benefit. And yes, it is more stressful than not multitasking. That said, it’s a daily part of business life. Things happen. Priorities change. Something crops up that is more important than what you’re working on. The task at hand will suffer, but your overall management effectiveness will benefit. Real-time flexibility - interruption and prioritisation - is critical in management systems.
• Information or communication overload and multitasking are two completely different things. McKinsey wrote a report about information overload that says, “Always-on, multitasking work environments are killing productivity, dampening creativity, and making us unhappy.” The problem is that, by lumping communication overload - a bad thing - in with management multitasking - a good thing - McKinsey is confusing people.
• If you email or text while you’re in a meeting, you can’t possibly be paying attention. Things have to be repeated and that wastes everybody’s time.
• Likewise, when you’re meeting one-on-one or in a small group, you should give them your undivided attention. Not only is that more efficient for everyone, it’s called treating people with respect.
The truth of the matter is that Doctors, chefs, engineers, project managers, marketers, salespeople, line managers, executives, small business owners - anyone with decision-making, managing, or leadership in their job description needs to multitask. It comes with the territory. It’s part of business and management life. Don’t confuse it with single-task performance, communication overload, or distraction and lack of concentration.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
