Did you read the previous post about lying about work? Today, another dose of truths and myths, because as it turns out, the topic addressed by Marcus Buckingham and Ashley Goodall in their book “Nine Lies About Work. An Unconventional Guide for the Critical Thinking Leader” is generating a lot of interest.

From the aforementioned labor myths, these conclusions emerged:

1. people care about what team they work for, not what company they work for.

2 The best intelligence, not the best plan, leads to success.

3. the best companies cascade meaning, not goals.

Today, more lies about work that you should think about.

Lie 4: The best employees are versatile

Who wouldn’t want to be a Renaissance man – versatile, talented and bringing value in every field? Probably each of us has such dreams, but the reality is a little different. Some of the tasks we perform give us genuine pleasure, while for others we have absolutely no talent or heart. It is also the case that even if we can do many things, only some of them bring us true satisfaction.

Drawing on numerous studies and statistics, Buckingham and Goodall emphasize that our greatest productivity is guaranteed by doing things at which we feel delight and joy. It sounds poetic and may seem far removed from business, but the authors are convinced that working in tune with people’s strengths is the primary impetus behind high-performance teams. What is surprising to them (and saddening to me), on the other hand, is that companies rarely seek out and capitalize on employees’ strengths. They prefer to use standardized models and encourage faithful reproduction. This is because they rely on the false assumption, according to the authors, that the best employees are versatile.

Calm

Buckingham and Goodall question the relevance of competency models. First, they believe that competence cannot be measured. Second, in their view, the process of assessing competence confuses traits (which require personality tests) with states (which neither managers nor co-workers can assess, as they cannot reliably determine the severity of a person’s state).

According to the authors, it is impossible to prove the claim that everyone who achieves excellence in a given job has a specific set of competencies. Excellence is a special quality, so every outstanding person is unique and different from everyone else, and he achieves excellence because he realized his uniqueness and developed it wisely. Of course, they do not deny the sense of self-improvement, but they believe that the greatest attention should be paid to strengths, because they are the source of advantage. Full agreement!

So what should a leader do?

• First and foremost, deal with achieving results. Define them, and then look out for manifestations of people’s strengths to understand how each of them can arrive at these results.
• Then assign roles to people, not the other way around.
• In addition, ensure that despite differences, people know, understand and appreciate the strengths of others. Everyone should have an equal understanding of the meaning and purpose of working together, and should foster an atmosphere of safety and trust so that everyone can make the most productive use of their strengths.

After all, Truth No. 4 is: Exceptional people are the best.

Lie 5: People need feedback about themselves.

Provocative, right? Especially in a world where the importance of feedback is emphasized at every turn, training is provided, and models are created to help give and receive feedback. Meanwhile, the authors say, people crave attention, and if it is shown to them in a safe environment and without judgment, they are happy to come to work, stay longer, and find pleasure in what they do.

Hmm… isn’t feedback a sign of attention after all? Even if it is negative? According to Gallup, the worst manager is one who ignores his employees (for every 1 engaged employee, there are then 20 indifferent ones). The research shows that it is more effective to correct employees and give negative feedback (the ratio of engaged to indifferent increased 2:1), but only by giving positive feedback does the number of engaged to indifferent increase significantly (the ratio was 60:1).

What is the conclusion? According to the authors, such that people do not need feedback. Instead, they expect to be paid attention to what they can do best – then their commitment and willingness to learn grows. That’s why it’s a good idea to “catch” employees doing a good and solid job. And it is not about praise, but more about showing appreciation (it has more to do with cognition, i.e. gaining knowledge about the other person). The whole art is not to limit ourselves to telling people what they did brilliantly, but to emphasize what we experienced while they shone with their mastery.

Of course, if someone fails at his job, correction is necessary, but it is important to maintain the right proportions (ideally they should oscillate between 3:1 and 5:1 in favor of recognition). And in this situation, how do you advise employees when they need it? Ask about the current state of affairs, and then direct attention to actions that have worked in the past, in order to encourage the generation of their own solution for the future.

Truth No. 5 is that people need attention.

Lie 6: People can credibly judge others.

The authors of “Ten Lies About Work” question whether people can reliably judge others. Why? Because in their opinion they are not perceptive enough. They are not able to accurately assess each member of the team in terms of each of their characteristics. In addition, their assessment may differ from that of other leaders.

While organizations spend a lot of time and money teaching managers how to evaluate, calibrate and analyze talent, the evaluation process breeds tremendous frustration like no other, even more so when a forced evaluation distribution is used. How reliable is the evaluation of another person when 54% of it depends on the personality of the evaluator. “We think that evaluation tools are windows through which we can see other people, but in fact they are just mirrors showing our reflection endlessly,” the authors say. Detailed scales and descriptions are not a lifesaver, as they further strengthen the effect of the evaluator’s influence. As a result, evaluation systems do not measure what they should measure. Frustrating right?

According to the authors, the solution is to change the way we evaluate – to move from evaluating others to a much more reliable evaluation of our own experiences. This is because we know who we will turn to when we care about something, and we know who we most like to work with. We can name the person we would give the promotion to today if we could. The subjectivity of the data – reflecting our feelings and intentions – becomes an advantage at this point. According to the authors, this is enough.

Truth 6: People can reliably evaluate their experiences.

What do you think about the listed myths about work? Do your experiences match the authors’ theses? Or do you completely disagree with them? I encourage you to reflect and share your comments. In the next post, I will discuss the last three lies on Buckingham and Goodall’s list.