Build People – Focus on Potential, a Leadership Task

ToolsWhile walking through Home Depot, my favorite aisles are those aisles with tools, power tools, hand tools, and so forth.  My mind always goes on imaginative wanderings, thinking about what those tools will go out into the world and do.  Will an inexperienced hand learn on those tools?  Will they build grand buildings?  Will they destroy?  What will those tools help accomplish?  The potential held in a tool is as much a mystery as looking at a babe in arms and thinking, what will that soul go forward and do?  I never become bored thinking about the potential held in a tool as part of the ongoing saga of humanity.

Without hands, a tool is useless; the tool cannot act independently.  Guns do not shoot themselves; hammers do not strike anything alone; thus, we can see that tools need someone to fulfill the measure of their creation.  For good or ill, the tool is only ever a force multiplier and requires intention through another party to act.  A critical point to understand is the person’s intention of holding the tool, who decides whether that tool will build or destroy, and the value to the owner.

Knowledge Check!But, this article is about people’s potential; why begin discussing tools?  To a leader, each person is a tool requiring training, delegation, trust, and motivation to achieve the measure of their creation.  Have you ever witnessed an unskilled manager use, or abuse, their people?  My first officer in the US Army National Guard was one of these unskilled managers.  The stories and experiences from this manager are legion, fraught with examples of what not to do and the hubris of a person placed into a position of power above their competence level.  I have long wondered, what did this officer’s boss think about this officer’s performance?

The first lesson in building people is this; everyone has someone they report to.  Do your people know who they report to, and are they comfortable talking to this person?  Consider the following:

Leadership is solving problems.  The day soldiers stop bringing you their problems is the day you have stopped leading them.  They have either lost confidence that you can help or concluded you do not care.  Either case is a failure of leadership.” – General Colin Powell

In more than nine years of Military Service, I can count on one hand the number of officers I trusted enough and were approachable sufficient to bring problems to, and I won’t even need the pinky and thumb.  In talking to friends and family about this issue, their experiences are similar.  Worse, the same problem exists with the non-commissioned officer corps.  In my professional pursuits outside military service, I have worked with precisely one boss to whom I felt comfortable bringing issues.

While I strive to be the leader I wish I could take problems to, there is a realization that to my teams, I am being measured, weighed, and if found wanting, will never know I failed to be the leader to whom I would bring problems.  Consider this for a moment.  A leader could be solving problems and thinking, “My people bring their problems to me QED: I am a good leader.”  While never realizing they are detestable and hated by their people.  All because their people only bring work-related problems, and then only rarely.  In the US Navy, I experienced this exact issue more than once, and the officers all thought they were “God’s gift to their people.” Massive egos, compensating for being vile and despicable.

Leaders, take note:

    1. What are the preferred names of the members of your teams?
    2. When was the last time you shared problems and asked for input from your followers?
    3. What are you learning daily, and who is teaching you?
    4. Do you know your followers sufficiently to advise?
    5. What quirks, talents, skills, or abilities do your people possess that you appreciate?

How you answer these questions determines more than your destiny as a leader and your team’s productivity in achieving business goals.  When I begin a new project and select tools, I review what I know about my tools.  My hammer has a loose head, but I will not change it out because it has the smoothness of age and is the best hammer for finishing work.  This wrench has scratches in the head and a chisel mark in the handle that is exactly 6” and is handy in a pinch.  Thus, when used on soft brass, the head will leave marks in the metal on which it is used.  All this and more is reviewed, strengths and weaknesses, quirks and peculiarities, all known before engaging in a new project.  When you know your tools, their potential is declared, and in communicating their potential, how and where they can be best used becomes common knowledge.

Leadership is a potent combination of strategy and character.  But if you must be without one, be without strategy.” – General Schwarzkopf

Ninety-Nine present of leadership failures are failures of character.” – General Schwarzkopf

Several of the worst people I have ever worked for had the moral integrity of a used car salesperson.  They could not be trusted, except to be trusted to stab you in the back.  No honesty, never forthright, always acting for the downfall of anyone they deemed was competition, and constantly engaged in stealing glory while meting out the worst punishments.  While the experiences fulfilled another axiom from General Schwarzkopf, the education was brutal to suffer through.

You learn far more from negative leadership than from positive leadership.  Because you learn how not to do it, and, therefore, you learn how to do it.” – General Schwarzkopf

These experiences alone would qualify me to write this article; however, through a multitude of academic classes and degrees, I have gained more fundamental qualifications to justify what I am about to declare.  If you think a title makes you a leader, you are the problem in your organization’s leadership!  In working with newly minted, freshly commissioned, officers in the US Army and the US Navy, I have learned through sad experience too many consider the rank and titles their “Golden Ticket” to being abusers of people through “leadership.”  One particular example stands out more clearly from the others.

While serving in the US Navy, my first Chief Engineer was book smart and common sense inept!  This man was more dangerous with tools in his hand, even though he could verbatim quote pages from maintenance manuals.  Shortly before I arrived on the ship, the Chief Engineer had started a fire on board the vessel in multiple engine and auxiliary rooms by applying shaft brakes to an operating shaft instead of to the shaft that had been locked out and tagged out.  The Chief Engineer then compounded his errors by blaming the engineers who had properly locked out/tagged out the shaft needing maintenance.  This was a major issue that proved cream rises and trash sinks, and this leader was absolute trash!

The bitter cherry on this crap sundae, the example of the Chief Engineer, was a symptom of a greater sickness and moral desert in the Engineering Department.  Chiefs were force-multiplying the Chief Engineers example, and the senior non-commissioned officers were force-multiplying the chiefs example.  Who suffered, the lowest enlisted, and the rest of the ship.  Maintenace was rarely done properly, watchstanding was hit or miss, and the example plagued the Engineering Department for years after the Chief Engineer was summarily dismissed.

The only redeeming factor from this experience, I learned the lessons of what negative leadership does well.  Leaders take note:

    1. If character problems lead to poor performance or behaviors detestable in your teams, look no further than the reflection in the mirror for both an answer and a root cause.
    2. Your followers will observe what you do more than what you say. How are you acting?
    3. Stop looking up, you are a leader, and your first vision should be to look sideways and make sure your people are on the same level before you look up.
    4. Before embracing new strategies, first review character!

The following is critical to building people and promoting potential:

To be an effective leader, you have to have a manipulative streak – you have to figure out the people working for you and give each tasks that will take advantage of their strengths.” – General Schwarzkopf

Leadership is a balancing act between helping people take advantage of their strengths and training them to overcome individual weaknesses.  Yet, leaders often act like managers, never training, and always micro-managing to shave strengths preventing competition with the leader.  Which are the actions of neither a leader nor a manager, but a tyrant!  Petty authoritarians acting the role of tyrants produce more harm than war, poverty, and disease combined.

What actions are needed?  We conclude with the following:

TRUE courage is being afraid, and going ahead and doing your job.” – General Schwarzkopf

The job of a leader begins with being a good follower; even if to be a good follower, you must be the loyal opposition standing like a rock doing the right thing in the face of adversity.  Moral integrity is critical to being a good leader and is foundational to building people.  Leaders take special note and act accordingly:

    1. What is your moral code?
    2. Why do you embrace those morals?
    3. Do you understand integrity is doing what is right, especially when you think nobody is watching? Do you have moral integrity?
    4. Do you know your identity, and are you comfortable with your identity?
    5. What character do you possess, and is that character tied to your morality and integrity?Exclamation Mark

When you are placed to influence people, build potential by first knowing, and then doing that which is the harder right, than the easier wrong.

© Copyright 2021 – M. Dave Salisbury
The author holds no claims for the art used herein, the pictures were obtained in the public domain, and the intellectual property belongs to those who created the images.  Quoted materials remain the property of the original author.

What Draws People Together? – A Discussion

Father MulcahyWith gratitude to C. S. Lewis, today’s article is not meant to be my pontificating on a particular topic, but a discussion where we work to find commonality and increase knowledge.  I cannot stress this enough; I am not the end-all resource on a topic, especially topics I remain utterly ignorant about.  Love, friendship, charity, and many more are topics I am learning about and if you are a subject matter expert, feel free to join the conversation, add comments below, and let’s learn together.

As we begin, I will stress one more point; it is a pattern I have learned well.  “We teach that we may learn more perfectly.”  Thus, while I remain thoroughly ignorant, I will teach what I know, what I have found, and what I suspect so that I may learn more perfectly what I desire.  Welcome!

Love is not affectionate feeling, but a steady wish for the loved person’s ultimate good as far as it can be obtained.” ― C.S. Lewis

As a kid, love was getting beat, having chores heaped up, and being punished as my mother was God’s right-hand person.  Her favorite saying was, “That was God punishing you for what you did.”  I have had a complicated relationship with God ever since I could remember.  Worse, this relationship has been clouded with a misunderstanding about love, chastisement, and punishment.  The quote above from C. S. Lewis is one I have been thinking about and continue to try and understand its application.

What draws people to be friends is that they see the same truth. They share it.” ― C.S. Lewis

Friendship is born at that moment when one person says to another: ‘What! You too? I thought I was the only one.’” ― C.S. Lewis

These two messages on friendship are, to me, very important.  But, I have found that the importance varies based upon whether people form around a personality trait or a truth.  For example, I choose to be a bibliophile.  Books are fundamental to my personality, identity, and methods of looking at the world.  But not all books are worthy of being in my library or possessing the same value.  When I find people who have read the same book, found similar truths, these people become value-added relationships, and together we move forward.  As a foodie, as a baker, as a distinguished eater of good foods, I have met many people.  But very few of them joined my society for very long, as their association is built upon food, not truth.  Are the distinguishing characteristics understood?

You have never talked to a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilizations are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub and exploit – immortal horrors or everlasting splendors.” ― C.S. Lewis

Consider this unique perspective and inherent truth; we are immortal spirits having a mortal experience.  But, inherent in this truth from C. S. Lewis is the individual’s choice to be either an immortal horror or everlasting splendor.  To some people, I am an immortal horror because of my actions in their society, and to these people, I offer a sincere apology.  These people know who they are, know how they were hurt, and if I could, I wish, I could go back in time and change my actions.  I wish the opposite were true, that there were people who would consider me an eternal splendor, for that is what I have been working to achieve in human relations for a long time now.  Still, I remain an immortal personality, spirit, and individual.

Everyone thinks forgiveness is a lovely idea until he has something to forgive.” ― C.S. Lewis

Or something to be forgiven for… do you think C. S. Lewis intentionally left this part out in this statement?  What is more difficult, forgiving someone else, forgiving ourselves, or being forgiven?  I do not have this answer, but I find the question intriguing.  I am not venturing into religion, religiosity, or preaching religious dogma in asking this question.  I am merely asking for consideration of a tool.  Forgiveness is a useful tool, for, through forgiveness, we begin the process of forgetting, healing from physical, spiritual, and mental/emotional wounds.  Wounds that cannot find closure and healing any other way.  But one of the things I learned about injuries is focusing on them, poking them, ripping scabs off, all these things, and more are reopening those wounds, where forgiveness is like a really good bandage that holds both a pain reliever and a healing cream to speed healing.  Yet, how often do we refuse this tool, or worse, use this tool for a limited amount, not allowing the entire wound to heal?

“..Friendship is not a reward for our discriminating and good taste in finding one another out. It is the instrument by which God reveals to each of us the beauties of others.” ― C.S. Lewis, The Four Loves

I have met some ugly people whose physical features are terrible, but they are beautiful and lovely immortal beings.  On the opposite, I have unfortunately met some physically beautiful people who are ravening wolves and immortal horrors, where I curse the day we ever crossed paths.  What never ceases to amaze me is that physical beauty and internal splendor or horror are not mutually exclusive or inclusive.  The physical is generally the results of choices others have made and reflect the injuries overcome, whereas the internal is all individual choices, compounded over time, into horror or splendor.  One of the truths I have found is patience is generally the perfect revelator of another person’s horror or splendor, and rushing the judgment always leads to a need for forgiveness.

We live, in fact, in a world starved for solitude, silence, and private: and therefore starved for meditation and true friendship.” ― C.S. Lewis, The Weight of Glory

Do we understand this pattern, as laid out by C. S. Lewis?  How often has a good friend promoted solitude, silence, and private thoughts and contemplations within ourselves that have led to meditation and deeper friendships?  I married my best friend.  Sometimes we fight like brothers, more often though her input has caused this pattern to be unfolded to me in new and interesting ways.  Sometimes we disagree on topics and get quite vocal in our discussions.  Sometimes we disagree quietly and wait for the other to come around when in reality, we are generally waiting for ourselves to realize and learn.  For the better part of almost three decades, we have lived after the manner of learners, and this friendship has only deepened.  Even though sometimes frustrations run high, the friendship has value for inspiring this pattern to be effective.

Pain insists upon being attended to. God whispers to us in our pleasures, speaks in our consciences, but shouts in our pains. It is his megaphone to rouse a deaf world.” ― C.S. Lewis

Hardship often prepares an ordinary person for an extraordinary destiny.” ― C.S. Lewis

Does hardship ever come without pain?  I remember my first week or so in US Army Basic Training; the pain in my muscles was incredible, and the torture of physical exercise I thought was going to kill me.  Yet, I put on weight (muscle) because of basic training, I learned endurance, and the results have been nothing but beneficial.  Thus, I could say, basic training was a megaphone of pain to rouse a deaf person to action, and the resulting life changes have been extraordinary.  Do we kick and curse the pain, or do we hold deep to the hope that the pain will lead to something extraordinary?  The choice is important, the pain is temporary (always), and the resulting consequences determine our destiny.

The homemaker has the ultimate career. All other careers exist for one purpose only – and that is to support the ultimate career. ” ― C.S. Lewis

Never Give Up!We conclude with this thought and provide honor to those who are the homemakers!  One of the first things I learned as a military dependent is that the military spouses, the homemakers who watch hearth and tend the wounds, are incredible people.  As a military servicemember, I learned a new appreciation for my homemaker and the friends and family who supported her in the ultimate career.  As a veteran, my appreciation for the role of the ultimate career professional has only deepened and widened.  As we go into Thanksgiving celebrations, remember the homemakers, male and female, who, through tending hearth and home, make the job of supporting the homemaker easier and more bearable.

© Copyright 2021 – M. Dave Salisbury
The author holds no claims for the art used herein, the pictures were obtained in the public domain, and the intellectual property belongs to those who created the images.  Quoted materials remain the property of the original author.

NO MORE BS: The Rule of Law – A Primer

ApathyAll advanced human actions, the weather, the natural world all operate on the law.  Understanding the rules of that law enables all the sciences, arts, music, and advanced human action the world has witnessed as humans have gained and lost civilization throughout history.  The following is a primer on the rule of law, a concept oft mentioned in these articles, to advance our collective understanding and provide impetus towards correcting the government.

Consider electricity; it exists in nature in uncontrolled ways and means.  Static electricity, lightning, other discharges exist when electrons get free and need to be grounded.  It took millennia for man to understand and harness electricity in the crudest of manners and methods.  It took another millennium for man to understand the laws of electricity, create, harness, and purposefully use electricity to improve the human condition.  Ancient examples of electricity exit in Egyptian tombs and other sites of antiquity that amaze and mystify us in the current history of man, for we do not understand the why behind the ancient uses and make guesses as to why electricity was used.

The critical part in our discussion of electricity is discovering and then living obediently to the rules and laws governing electricity.  Without exception, if you abuse the power of electricity, harm occurs, and death is ever-present.  I have witnessed surges of electricity start fires, throw people across rooms, and stop hearts as effortlessly as I type.  Speak with an electrician or engineer, and you will hear tales of inexperienced, uneducated, or fool-hardy people breaking the laws of electricity and the amazing results that transpired.  Speak to these same people, and you can see the advantages and blessings of obedience to the laws of electricity and the power of electricity to improve lives, heal the sick, and raise the dead; all, because the rule of law is adhered to by practitioners and electricity, is safely harnessed and used according to the understood laws.

Image - Quote Poltics is DirtyTesla understood electricity’s laws and rules better than any other person in history and died too soon for his knowledge of those rules to be both accepted and applied to the human condition.  Edison, Westinghouse, and Tesla had a unique and troubled history and relationships.  Due to the desire to make money on delivering electricity, Tesla’s Tower for providing electricity through the air without a delivery network of wires, substations, and generators, was forced to be suspended, and Edison and Westinghouse beat Tesla into obscurity almost.  Edison, Westinghouse, and Tesla’s relationship is not the topic; although highly interesting and an excellent example of capitalism working to destroy people, the rule of law and obedience to the understood rules and laws is the topic.

Consider the internal combustion engine.  I have heard it postulated on more than one occasion that after gravity, the internal combustion engine is continuously being researched and debated by engineers, physicists, and other scientific people in an attempt to improve human understanding.  Electricity remains on this list as we are learning more laws and rules that expand knowledge, which then develops human applications.  Hence, when we speak of the rule of law, we speak of current law, future discoveries, and historical application.  The historical applications of laws and rules often lead to insights into everyday situations and predict where the future may lie on a particular topic.

The Duty of AmericansSome may complain; I  am speaking only about natural laws, and man’s laws, as applied through government, are different from natural law.  To those who suggest this, I say, unequivocally, “Hogwash!”  How did man form the government; they watched the natural order and created a mimicry of the natural order into society, and then began working to improve that social order to achieve what nature, or the natural world, does automatically.

Consider the starlings, little birds, that fly in concert so intricately and beautifully, acting in a harmony of motion that appears to defy the social order and government of bird flight.  Yet, the starlings’ rules and laws allow for their society to fly and mystify humans.  Deer, Elk, Moose, Mice, and so many other animal societies have been mimicked by humans into a form of government and social order, bringing with it rules and laws that apply, strictly, to that society.

Editorial - Educational TruthAmerica has a lot of rules and laws.  In an attempt to capture the width and breadth of laws and rules in America, the following statement is made, “Congress has enacted approximately 200–600 statutes during each of its 115 biennial terms so that more than 30,000 statutes have been enacted since 1789.”  A more straightforward explanation is made on a different source, “Nobody Knows!”  The first and most fundamental law is the US Constitution and US Bill of Rights.  Under the rule of law, the judicial and legislative branches of government are expected to follow and closely adhere to these fundamental documents when creating laws and rules.  However, the legislative branch has abdicated its role to the judicial branch.  The judicial branch has become infested with activists and militant and mutton-headed pillocks from both current political parties’ extremes until the law has become defiled, and American Society suffers.

The same pattern has been observed in every democratic society across the globe, with the United Kingdom, France, Greece, and Germany, leading to diminution of the understanding and governance of law.  Hence, according to just laws and rules, the social orders that used to mimic natural orders have become lost in the morass of bias and opinions forming a legal quagmire where even obeying the law has become too difficult no one knows the laws sufficiently.  Even though the legal premise remains, “Ignorance of the law is no excuse.”

PatriotismAmerica, consider the number of “Executive Orders” written by the current and fraudulent president?  The UK, consider how long it took to leave the EU and the bureaucrats who continue to thwart the people’s will?  Israel, how many elections will it take for you to have a stable government again?  German, you get the same question as Israel, and we all know how France and Greece could not form a cohesive government even though their lives depend upon a functioning government.

Citizens of Democratic governments, and America, a Republic, must understand the basic role and functioning of government to not cradle-to-grave care for a citizen, but to protect the national boarders and do as little harm as possible.  That is the government’s entire function; look at any social order in the animal kingdom, and this truth becomes evident very quickly.  Yet, humans continue to try and shape government into an instrument to beat and betray their fellow men in the name of plastic terms like “fair,” “equity,” and “New,” among many others.

Andragogy - LEARNWhat does a citizen of these governments do?

I have some suggestions, but the leading and most crucial request is to understand and then act.  We must fundamentally shift our understanding of, and then actions of, the governments that have grown beyond control.

      1. Observe natural order and consider your current government. If they do not match, you have a problem.  Acknowledge that problem exists!
      2. Understand the role of the “Rule of Law.” As the natural order goes, so should human government.
      3. Without a doubt, when natural laws are broken, death follows. Governments are dying because they have disregarded this simple principle.  Awake and arise before the globe enters another World War; because we all know how those turn out!
      4. Once you know, ACT! Vote!  Raise your voice!  Disclaim that in no uncertain terms, you are refusing and refuting the government’s power to rule you!
      5. As you learn, teach, so you may learn more succinctly, thus empowering your ability to train more powerfully. Your neighbors need this same information so you can act in concert.  Consider the starling; how fast will a starling die if they do not fly in formation properly; not bloody long.

Never Give Up!Remember, this is but a starting point in changing government, but we must start!  Embrace a “Liberty FIRST Culture,” and let us citizens act, for we own the government, not the other way round!  Never stop trying, learning, and reaching out.  When the government breaks the natural order, death becomes a real possibility, either through war, rebellion, or simply anarchy as government dies.

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

NO MORE BS: The Historical Roots of Progressive Education

Gears[Public Service notice: All quotations arrive from Paulo Lionni’s, “The Leipzig Connection.”]

Paulo Lionni. “The Leipzig Connection” points out some history of great importance to understanding K-12 education.  As American students left the U.S. for Germany to study under Wilhelm Wundt in Leipzig, they returned to America and either landed faculty jobs in psychology departments or branched out into education, specifically training K-12 teachers.  Each of these returning students wanted introspection to be measured, believed the human was an animal with no soul or divinity, and each of them left impressions upon teachers entering classrooms of K-12.

VirtueThe first of Wundt’s American students to return to the United States was G. Stanley Hall.  Hall became known for his intensive studies of child development, directly fostering the child study movement in America.  In 1904 Hall published his masterwork, the two-volume “Adolescence: Its Psychology and Its Relations to Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex, Crime, Religion, and Education,” welding experimental psychology to child education.  Never forget, many of these new K-12 Educators also crossed professional paths with John Dewey, who remained adamantly opposed to literate students.  Another name in early K-12 progressive education is Edward Lee Thorndike, who was fond of declaring, “Subjects such as arithmetic, language, and history include content that is intrinsically of little value.”

Progressive education is nothing but experimental psychology, renamed, remarketed, and reliving the experiments, over and over.  The ultimate example of Einstein’s definition of insanity repeats on every new generation of unsuspecting students.  The work of dumbing down students has been launched successfully at this point in history.

The way Ph.D. Education worked in the late 1800s through the early1900s; a doctoral student found a Ph.D. holder, mimicked them, and increased the original research by extending their research into future application.  Hence, the need to fully understand Dewey and his influence upon those who graduated as Ph.D. holders who went on to lead colleges, laboratories, and experiment on children in K-12 Education.  Dewey contended that the public schools must “take an active part in determining the social order of the future… according as the teachers align themselves with the newer forces making for social control of economic forces.” Further, Dewey insisted that “… learning occurred only through experience, that the stimulus-response mechanism was basic to learning, and that teachers were not instructors, but designers of learning experiences [Emphasis Mine].”

Detective 2The shift in defining education changed the teacher’s role in the classroom. The insistence upon modern psychology having a free reign in the K-12 classrooms meant that the students were always being experimented upon, measured, sensory gratification induced, and socialized into education, not taught.  I have read accounts of progressive education experiences from England in the early 1900s, where the learning experiences meant some kid got pummeled by a bully, and the bully and victim had to relate what they learned from the experience.  Unfortunately, the same tripe is occurring in today’s classrooms.  While substituting, I experienced continual class time interruptions for standardized tests, surveys, information-gathering research, etc. All examples of modern psychology’s influence still treating K-12 students as pieces of information to be harvested instead of minds needing education.  My K-12 years were spent taking standardized tests, one in the fall, one in the spring, a big one at fourth, eighth, and twelfth grades, not mentioning SAT, ACT, ASVAB, etc.

What does a designer of learning experiences look like in reality?

I substitute taught in 4-APA English classes and 4-English classes for a period of almost 90-days.  The “designed learning experiences” included helping students feel Hester Prynne’s castigation while reading “The Scarlet Letter.”  Except, most of the students assigned to read the book refused. Those who read the book carried the “classroom discussions,” and the discussions never really discussed the book, the social issues, or worked to draw interest.  Worse, the majority of the student’s time was spent on workbooks with tear-out pages, where I, as the teacher, could only answer questions about the materials in the books, not teach the materials.  My hands were tied about how, what, when, and where I could instruct.  If a good discussion was started in an APA class, that discussion could not be continued onto another class, and many questions were forced unanswered.  Leaving frustration, social animosity, and producing a monumental waste of time.

Theres moreI asked full-time teachers what they thought and was surprised that their frustrations were not more significant.  One particularly fine comment has stuck with me, “You either learn to live with frustration, or you get out of teaching.”  I am a third option kind of person; I want to change the system, save children’s potential, and keep the American Heritage alive for another generation.

Where does Teacher Frustration Originate?

One of Wundt’s assistants and a Ph.D. student was James Mc-Keen Cattell, who measured how adults read, then assumed children did not need phonics to sound out words but could read using whole word memorization.  Notice the logic problem here; the adults measured had learned how to read using phonics, then honed their skills over time.  Cattell wanted to skip the learning stage and the honing stage and have children jump into whole-word memorization without phonics’ building blocks.  Guess what happened; dyslexia was born.  Because the student never had a proper foundation to read, reading became a chore, a hassle, and a struggle.  The students in these progressive schools were handed an excuse, a disease, and reading comprehension standards, reading ability, and reading literacy dropped significantly.  Not to mention the literary arts, or the art of expression through language was lost entirely.

Detective 4Admittedly, the most basic and essential skill a child needs is the ability to read.  Reading is paramount in everything a person does; math, science, history, language, etc., all depend upon the ability to read well.  Yet, Cattell removed the learning and honing experiences in reading, and the world has been worse off.  But, to refuse whole-word memorization and teach phonics in a classroom is a sin comparable to eating your own child. Want an interesting fact, whole-word memorization, also known as sight-reading, has been confirmed through peer-reviewed research as not increasing literacy rates.  Since Dewey was adamantly opposed to literate students, the psychologists won, and phonics was replaced.

Bringing the conversation to Charles Darwin and Darwin’s cousin Francis Galton.  “Galton’s theories held that ‘a man’s natural abilities are derived by inheritance, under exactly the same limitations as are the form and physical features of the whole organic world.’” Cattell quickly absorbed Galton’s approach to Eugenics, selective breeding, and the measurement of intelligence based upon race, poverty, and genetics. Cattell was later to become the American leader in psychological testing, and in 1894 would administer the first battery of standardized psychological tests ever given to a large group of people.”

Wundt maintained that humans are animals, and animal breeding is connected to Eugenics; thus, humans breed through Eugenics.  Eugenics is the practice or advocacy of improving the human species by selectively mating people with specific desirable hereditary traits. It aims to reduce human suffering by “breeding out” disease, disabilities, and so-called undesirable characteristics from the human population.

What is the problem with Eugenics?

Andragogy - LEARNWho determines “undesirable hereditary traits?”  Is poverty an undesirable hereditary trait?  If so, then which gene is the poverty gene?  Which race is “undesirable” and needs “bred out of the human genome?”  Which “disabilities” are “undesirable characteristics” dyslexia has been made a handicap, injuries that lead to handicaps are those “undesirable?”  Who chooses “selective mating?”  How are selective mating couples selected?  The abortion movement and Margaret Sanger are mentioned here due to the stress of Eugenics upon student education beliefs:

    • Continuous Issue (1973) – Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court.  The Court ruled that the United States Constitution protects a pregnant woman’s liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction.
        • A little history on this subject, the 1820s and 1830s abortions were common through the fourth month of pregnancy, and herbs, pills, and other home remedies were prevalent for use. Then, the physicians of America and the government stepped in to prevent poisoning and assert control over home remedies, midwives, and other medical opinion providers of the time.
        • New York was the first state to legalize or codify into law abortion as a public health measure to improve women’s lives. But the abortion industry had not begun targeting Black and minority communities.  The first women getting abortions mainstream were middle- or upper-class white married women.
        • Original feminists opposed abortion practices and wanted only voluntary motherhood through the “right of women to control sex with their husbands.”
        • The original laws banning abortion were enacted to humiliate women who had to discuss their bedroom affairs with the executive and judicial branch representatives.
        • Judges decided to outlaw abortion through judicial activism because it took the legislative branch too long to enact laws the special interest groups, e.g., the American Medical Association (AMA), wanted.
        • Judges then decided to make abortion on demand legal through judicial activism, because again, it was taking too long for the legislative branch to act and enact laws.
        • Thus, judicial activism and abortion have a long and sordid history of causing chaos in America since at least the 1840s. Hence, when a person discusses Roe v. Wade, they are only discussing the abortion on demand industry.

The other problem.

Based upon Wundt’s beliefs and teaching, propagated by Dewey and instilled in the beliefs that psychology and pedagogical education are inseparably connected, the reader arrives back at Thorndike.  Thorndike proposed making “the study of teaching scientific and practical.” This is his definition of the art of teaching: “…the art of giving and withholding stimuli with the result of producing or preventing certain responses.”  Thorndike believed, taught, and wrote about how children are nothing but animals, the same as chickens, cats, dogs, fish, etc., and through stimulation, responses can be programmed.

Behavior-ChangeFor example, a child is handed an assignment book.  Keeping the book clean and neat earns them a star, doing assignments earns them a star, being clean, and a myriad of other “socially accepted stimuli” will earn them stars, with the promise of a huge reward at the end of the year for those who collect the most stars.  Programmed behavior became integral in pedagogical instruction methods, not training the mind to independence, responsibility, and accountability.  Like Pavlov, Thorndike wanted to stimulate a programmed response, controlling remotely those who were deemed lesser.  Including anybody who disagreed with their aims, methods and was not converted to Wundtian methods.

The problem is apparent, to increase liberty, freedoms, and reduce government size; conservatives must focus on, and win, the battle for the classroom K-12.  But only if you believe that a human has a divine spark, a soul, and is held accountable to an entity higher than oneself.  Many good people have been duped by plasticized language and the tyranny spawned from modular language, where the psychologists and pedagogical education cross.  Worse, there are faithful acolytes who not only believe that a human has no soul but are willing to enforce breeding programs to rid the world of unwanted traits and genetic undesirability.  The sad but undeniable truth, K-12 pedagogical education warfare has been waged and, supposedly, won by the modern psychologists, who fought without an enemy.

3-direectional-balanceForward action is explicit, we must stand against the tyranny occurring in the classroom, rooting out the progressive education that was sold, and enslaved us, or our children will lose this precious country.  There is no third option here, we either win the classroom and remain a Republic, or we lose the classroom and lose the republic.  First, we must learn and raise our literacy rates.  Second, we educate our children and increase their literacy rates.  Third, we challenge, respectfully and legally, the actions of those on school boards.

Accept the challenge. … READ!

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the photos displayed.

Uncomfortable Truths – More News from Albuquerque Public Schools

Some friends discovered I was attempting, again, to work as a substitute teacher for Albuquerque Public Schools (APS) and told me to not waste my time and talents.  They then shared with me some of the recent changes and more issues at APS that shocked and horrified me.  I do not have a student in the APS school district; thus, all I can do is relate their stories here in the hopes of generating enough angst that someone in the Department of Education will rip the scab off the injury called APS, and begin some sunshine disinfectant.

Government Largess 2An Educational Assistant (EA; Teacher’s Aide) was called upon to be a substitute teacher in Seventh Grade math; because APS is bereft of substitute teachers and is experiencing a teacher drought.  The EA is not a licensed substitute teacher; thus, when asked how this is legal, to have an EA substituting outside her regular work and expertise, she said she “didn’t know” and then acknowledged this is standard practice.  The EA went on to further elaborate saying that when she has asked for a substitute teacher because her teacher was out or off, she had a very low probability of ever getting a licensed substitute teacher and generally had to teach the class, with no extra money for doing extra work.  Why does the NM Professional Licensure classify licenses, and charge horrendous fees for licensure, if EA’s can be “regularly called upon to substitute teach?”  My friend has worked in four other states in the US as an Educational Assistant/Teacher’s Aide, and has never been licensed to be a substitute teacher; yet, somehow in APS, she can be regularly called upon to substitute teach.

While discussing teacher performance, another classic APS child abuse issue was uncovered, all while a good teacher is being forced out of her position.  Because of the teacher drought, APS is experiencing, and due to reduced registrations in a Bi-Lingual education school, an illiterate teacher in both Spanish and English, who had to pass a state-mandated test to get the license to teach bilingual students, is going to keep her job for another year.  This intellectually challenged teacher has been reported to APS more than a dozen times for swearing, insulting, and not being able to teach; but this teacher was just offered a full-time position teaching bilingual students, when she cannot speak/read/write in either English or Spanish at an academically acceptable level to teach others.  Due to falling registrations, a Kindergarten teacher, who was the last one hired at this school, is being laid-off.  The teacher, being terminated is a stellar teacher, works hard, is well-liked by staff, parents, and students.  Since joining APS, this phenomenal teacher has been assigned to “catch” those students from the most impoverished homes and get them up to speed academically.  Reported by all who know this teacher, she is exemplary in her assigned duties; fully 180-degrees separate from the illiterate teacher who landed her job under shady circumstances or nepotism.  Yet the bad teacher is being kept and the good discharged.  APS, and by extension, the NM Professional Licensure board, are committing child abuse on such a scale, there should be criminal charges.

I have been in business a long time, and one of the fundamental rules of business is if people are assigned to work, and mandatorily required to put in extra time, those people must be paid for their extra time.  In discussing job mandates and requirements with more than forty-different full-time, substitute, and EA instructional staff members of APS, a regular theme arises; if the school mandates the instructional staff is required to work, they will not be paid for their extra time.  For example, the EA discussed above, was called to substitute teach, spent 90-minutes after work writing notes to the regular teacher, and will not be reimbursed for her extra time.  Please note, this is 90-minutes on top of her regularly scheduled, non-paid, mandatory overtime.  Thus, every day, this EA loses 90-minutes of pay at the end of the day and between 60 and 90 minutes at the start of the day, with no reimbursement to cover this employer-mandated time.  With a regular school year average of 38-weeks, 5-days per week average worked, and roughly 150-minutes per day unpaid, an average EA salary of $15,116.50 ($9.95 per hour), this EA is losing approximately $2,836.70 each school year.  Where is the NM Department of Labor?  Where is the NM Legislature?  Where is the NM Public Education Department (NM PED), who also happens to be in charge of overseeing licensure?  As I understand this is a widespread general practice for all teaching staff, but I can attest that the administrators leave promptly on time and arrive on time, and if they must work late they are reimbursed for their time.  Why is the teaching staff treated differently?

Government Largess 4With a total grant budget of $1.6 Billion, no numbers have been found for the amount of tax revenue APS is handed, the school district is certainly well funded.  From the 2018-2019 school survey on APS performance, we find a common theme from the citizens to the APS school district, reduce administration costs.  The answer from APS school administrators was to, “Increase Counselors, Social Workers, Security and other staff to support our student’s mental and physical health … Increase Custodians across the schools [sic].”  The Albuquerque Journal reports that APS is the lead agency for taking tax dollar revenues.  With Bernalillo County and City of Albuquerque, plus property taxes, all being collected at ridiculous rates, APS must be getting a significant chunk of revenue; still, APS demands more money “For the children.”

Understanding checkpoint, we have more than one instance of a teacher unable to perform their duties, and verbally abusing students.  We have a functionally illiterate teacher who landed her position based on either shady circumstances, or through nepotism, and we have a recorded phenomenal teacher being summarily discharged during a teacher drought.  We have citizens, parents, and a concerned community begging for reduced administration, where APS then responds they are increasing administration.  Then we have non-licensed staff forced to work outside their licensure because the administration cannot obtain substitute teachers, and teaching staff forced to work extra hours without proper compensation.  Where is the public outrage?  Where are the lawyers?  Where are the politicians demanding answers?  These problems are not new to APS; why the silence?

You're FiredDuring the summer of 2019, for the first time in 15-years, APS full-time licensed teachers received a pay raise.  Not for the first time in 15-years, the teachers saw a slew of additional requirements, mandates, and reductions in alternative licensure to “pay” for the teacher pay raise.  All while the school board received yet another pay increase.  The voters have already told APS NO on a slew of tax increases and bond sale schemes; however, in November 2019, APS is trying again to raise taxes, raise money, and raise administrator salaries.  Albuquerque, the next time Bernalillo County, City of Albuquerque, or APS asks you for more money, ask them when they will deliver education to students, a reduced administration, and fix the teacher drought?  It is blatantly apparent to me that when APS, City of Albuquerque, or Bernalillo County claim, “It’s for the children,” they really mean they want a pay raise on your blood, sweat, and tears; tell them no!

© 2019 M. Dave Salisbury

All Rights Reserved

The images used herein were obtained in the public domain, this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

Leading the Call Center: Flavor of the Month Philosophies

Chinese CrisisHaving just completed a project that saw me leading a team in a call center, I want to make something clear; quick fixes and flavor of the month philosophies do not work.  I cannot stress this enough; yet, the practice continues to the detriment of call center employees and the organizations served by call centers.  Flavor of the month philosophies is the latest bestseller to fix the problems in business.  We have all seen these programs including, FISH, WAIT, Strengths Quest, and so much more.  These ideas are good ideas, and they possess value, but when changed monthly, these programs, never do more than briefly mark the surface intellect of the call center.  I am not disparaging these ideas in the least; let me elaborate as to why the flavor of the month idea fails.

The project previously mentioned when concluded saw the call center director very much converted to a program of definite value in and using one’s strengths entitled Strengths Quest as presented by Clifton, Anderson, and Schreiner (2006).  The culture of strength promotes unity, and by extension, organizational power, when combined intellectually, becomes the corporate culture.  Integration in business, especially in call center operations, remains crucial to bottom-line health.  The call center director invested a lot of organizational resources to capture everyone’s strengths, publish these advantages, and use this information to measure the call center.  The problem was the staff has no idea why they are investing company time in completing the “Clifton Strength’s FinderÒ (CSF),” and many completed this assignment while taking calls and distracted.  How verifiable is the data if the attention of the person completing the task is diverted?

My assignment, as a call center supervisor, included gauging the employees in the call center about their strengths.  Of the 10-employees in the call center, two had forgotten and blatantly said they do not care.  Three expressed a desire to retake the CSF to more fully focus on the task instead of completing it between calls.  Four employees asked why and what is the purpose of taking the CSF.  Finally, all the employees, when asked how they use the CSF data in their daily actions, expressed the same answer, I do not know.

Let’s be clear; there is nothing wrong with the latest flavor of the month programs to improve an organization, provided the leaders understand change, embrace change, train and teach “the what” and “the why,” and then remain committed long after the excitement over the bright new object fades.  I had the misfortune of working in a call center where the entire corporate culture was expected to change with every fresh flavor of leadership, and the organization is a mental mess.  What is a leader to do when each new flavor-of-the-month is presented as a potential fix for organizational dilemmas?  I suggest the following as a launching point for corporate discovery and leadership support.

  • If the organization is going to invest resources in a particular program, do not change for a set period, which includes pre- and post- measurement and evaluation. If the organization does not know where they start, they can never know what happened or where to go in the future.blue-money-burning
  • Organizational change must be more than surface polish or potential money (Blue Money) is lost, never to be recovered. Organizational change needs to fundamentally affect the organization and be allowed to produce measured results.  Does this mean that if something is not working, we keep at it?  No!  It means to provide sufficient time and measurement to gauge the application and the organizational change.  Many times beta-testing the proposed change can identify the processes, procedures, and other trouble points to be mindful of, or correct in beta-testing, to ensure full organizational change may occur with a higher chance for success.
  • Get everyone involved, enthused, and a willing advocate for the change. Getting everyone involved is not producing marketing materials and desk references.  Getting everyone involved requires explaining why and detailing what in the organizational change.  Getting everyone involved means there will be feedback, pushback, and rebellion.  Expect pushback, but never allow pushback to derail reform.  Pushback is a healthy activity that provides essential opportunities for the leader to explore solutions, answer questions, and evaluate the results.
  • Teach and train; train and teach. Learning should be a constant and desirable outcome of organizational change.  Teaching is not training, training is not teaching; but, both are critical skills needed for leaders and learners.  Teaching is helping someone else acquire knowledge.  Training is teaching a behavior or ability.  Teaching is usually one-way communication using measurement tools, e.g., tests to gauge knowledge learned and retained.  Training should be two-directional communication, is completed through experience in closely monitored environments, and includes 360-degree feedback to improve the training environment.  Never allow teaching and training to become the same confused term; while the words are closely related, they are not the same action.
  • When was the last time you discussed what you are reading with front-line employees? When was the last time you engaged a front-line worker about what they are reading, thinking, and ask for suggestions to improve?  When was the last time you asked to be trained on a process, procedure, or organizational action by those who do it all day?  If recently, did you ask why, a lot?  I promise you will be surprised when you have these conversations, especially since they open up opportunities to explain and expound, learn, change, adapt, and engage with those you lead.
  • Organizational change requires enthusiasm from all parties to begin to engage and deepen the shift from surface polish to fundamental culture adaptation. Enthusiasm takes many shapes, sizes, and colors, including the loyal opposition of followers, opinions, and feedback.  The leader must exemplify and honor, or support, the enthusiasm around them as a tool for succeeding in changing the organization.
  • Clarify intentions. Clarify processes.  Clarify procedures.  Clarify by asking follow-up questions and reflectively listen to obtain mutual understanding.  Clarification remains one of the most critical tasks in organizational change.  When confusion rears its ugly head, respond with explanation and follow-up, as detailed in two-directional communication.  When the comprehension is doubted, ask for feedback as an opportunity to increase clarification.  Clarification is both a tool and an opportunity; do not waste this opportunity and tool by neglecting those needing clarification.
  • Organizational change needs a mechanism for gathering data from many sources, including the employees affected, the vendors, the suppliers, and the customers. Open the valve for data to flow back.  One of the most horrific organizational changes it has been my displeasure to witness was increased because the leaders operated in a vacuum and never allowed data flow that was contradictory to the previously agreed upon results.  The leaders in this organization worked hard to refuse hard data, which contradicted their bias, and this ruined the business, the employees, and the customers.

I cannot guarantee following all these points will make organizational change succeed, roses bloom, bottom lines inflate, rainbows dance, and all of life fall into organized lines leading ever upward.  I can guarantee that without these points, organizational change that promotes an environment of learning will never be more than polish.  Consider the axiom, “Lipstick on a pig.”  The lipstick is not bad, the pig is not bad, but placing lipstick on a pig is out of place and does nothing to improve the pig.  Flavor-of-the-month changes are lipstick on a pig, not bad, but out of place until the entire organization is on board and enthusiastically supporting the move, and proper measurements are in place to gauge, measure, and report the change.

Business theorist Chris Argyris put forth a model, later discussed by Senge (1994) explaining our thinking process as we interact with the world.  This seven-step method is called the Ladder of Inference; according to this model, as we move up the ladder our beliefs affect what we infer about what we observe and therefore become part of how we experience our interaction with other people.  Organizational change can be plotted along the same model or ladder of inference.

Leadership LadderOrganizational change begins with information output; then collect data, preferably through listening and observation while doing the work; interpreting the data includes obtaining data, evaluating meaning, deciphering intent, and understanding value.  Please note, the assumptions should not be made in a vacuum and could be wrong; thus, always return to the data producers and ask questions to ensure mutual understanding.  Once conclusions are mutually understood, they become beliefs; but, don’t stop until beliefs become actions.

If a model is needed, please benchmark Quicken Loans and Southwest Airlines, both organizations are doing a tremendous job with the ladder steps, especially moving organizational beliefs into motivated organizational action.  Remember, one does not climb a ladder to view the horizon and scenery, they climb a ladder to begin working, carrying the tools needed to perform the work, and possessing certain knowledge that the work can be accomplished.  Climb the ladder of success with the intent to work, achieve, and move forward.

References

Clifton, D. O., Anderson “Chip,” E., & Schreiner, L. A. (2016). Strengths quest: Discover and develop your strengths in academics, career, and beyond (2nd ed.).

Senge. P. M. (1994). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Currency Doubleday.

© 2017 M. Dave Salisbury

All Rights Reserved

The images used herein were obtained in the public domain, this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

14 Rules on Leadership – Gen. George Washington: Shifting the Leadership Paradigm

General George Washington wrote “Rules on Civility” (1887) and helped to mold and model a growing social environment in America.  These 110 rules for civility also encapsulate good advice to leaders applicable still today and fourteen of them are discussed below as they bear direct application to the current societal ills.  The hope remains that in pointing out these rules leaders may become more of an example, business improves, and American Society as a whole begins to lift itself up to a higher level of performance.

Rule 19:

Let your countenance be pleasant but in serious matters somewhat grave.

I worked with a manager who made the following statement about the director we both answered to, “I never know whether he is joking, jesting, or simply being serious.”  This is a failure of leadership and can cause disharmony, chaos, and no end to trouble.  Model and exemplify pleasant emotions.  Never try to confuse your audience, never adopt an emotion without a purpose, and never make your audience to think or wonder about your emotional state or demeanor.  More importantly, looking pleasant builds confidence in those around you to act with pleasantness and harmony; so smile, speak softly, and generate pleasantness.

Rule 25:

Superfluous compliments and all affectation[s] of ceremonies are to be avoided, yet where due they are not to be neglected.

This speaks to offering sincere praise, showing gratitude, and returning credit to the source for things that are progressing well and accepting failure when poorly.  I had the displeasure of working with an officer who gave insincere praise making a great ceremony out of giving that insincere praise and then laughing at the person being singled out for the praise for not knowing how to proceed correctly.  The morale of the unit was disastrous and deadly.  Several members of that group held a deep desire for a “friendly fire incident” involving this officer as the victim.  The same problems arise in business and if left to fester potential is wasted, and money follows lost potential.

Don’t forget to limit ceremony, pomp, and procession to the level needed to honor the awardee without allowing the ceremony, pomp, or procession to exceed the degree of the award or the awardee’s comfort level.  Know the audience and limit the service to the comfort of the audience.  Thus allowing those being awarded and those in attendance to celebrate in a manner conducive to the award and their individual comfort level.

Rule 35:

Let your discourse with men of business be short and comprehensive.

We have all heard, and many live by the axiom, “Time is money.”  This rule from Gen. Washington speaks to the need for comprehension, timeliness, and specificity.  Limit the words, tone down the tone, restrict the emotional content, and get to the point; thus saving the audience’s attention and exemplifying respect for the other person in the communication.

Rule 39:

In writing or speaking, give to every person his due title according to his degree and the customs of the place.

Did you work hard for your title, yes; thus, reflect the respect for your title to others.  I met two different people in authority, 180-degrees apart from each other that saw this principle from opposing extremes.  One manager refused to use titles calling the whole thing meaningless while demanding respect for their personal rank and title.  20-year employees who had obtained great honor and respect amongst their peers received no respect from the leader who demanded respect.  The other leader cared a great deal for their title because of those who had held that title before them and respected others who had earned titles for the same reason.  The second leader had higher morale, less behavioral problems, and loyal people who achieved greatness.  The first leader had nothing but trouble, never could reach goals and objectives, and passed the failures to produce onto others.

In our global working environment, knowing the culture where titles and showing respect is critical to creating success.  More importantly, if you as a leader have not already cultivated respect for titles, the ability to show genuine respect for those of titles will place you at a disadvantage and harm the businesses you represent.  Make time to learn and practice showing proper respect for those with titles.

Rule 44:

When a man does all he can, though it succeed[s] not well, blame not him that did it.

How many times has success been snatched from the hands of those trying and the leader then berates, castigates, and derides those who tried?  Since measuring individual effort is not possible, first presume everyone did their best, then promote a spirit of learning from failure and build people.  Even if the actions were thought to be malicious and vengeful, praise and support people, you never know and in not knowing, do not assume!  I would also interject the following thought, Juran’s Rule details that when problems arise, 90% of the time the process is failing and only 10% of the time are people failing.  Thus, look to the processes, the procedures, the methods of work for answers, employ training, and only blame people as the ultimate last resort; this includes blaming yourself.

Rule 45:

Being to advise or reprehend anyone, consider whether it ought to be done in public or in private, and presently or at some other time; in what terms to do it; and in reproving show no signs of cholar but do it with all sweetness and mildness.

(Please note, the term “cholar” has had a spelling update and is now spelled “choler” and is defined as showing irascibility, anger, wrath, or irritability.  From Latin is the origin cholera.)

There is great truth hidden here; this rule mimics another axiom, “Praise in public and reprimand in private.”  While speaking to timeliness, this rule allows the leader to select when and where praise and reprimand occurs.  Do not forget Rule 19 emotion is a leadership tool, not a weapon; tools guide and instruct, weapons destroy and demoralize.  Use emotion wisely or choose to not use emotion at all per the rule above, but make emotion a conscious choice!

Rule 48:

Wherein you reprove another be unblameable yourself, — for example is more prevalent than precepts.

During my military service, I had a mid-level officer that hated and punished severely those who slept on watch, for a good reason.  The problem, the officer regularly slept on watch.  The example was more prevalent than the precepts taught and destroyed morale.  Rules 19, 45, and 48, all discuss powerful leadership principles along with a general theme and should be considered both individually and collectively to make the lessons more powerful.  First, know yourself, then know those you aspire to lead, and finally lead well.

Rule 49:

Use no reproachful language against anyone; neither curse nor revile.

In the world today, many confuse reprimand (rebuke or admonition) with reproach (finding fault, upbraiding, blaming, censure, disgrace or discredit) and this has led to a lot of confusion in communication.  More to the point, the language of leaders has coarsened, hardened, and plasticized or transitioned into bluster and buffoonery instead of calm and controlled.  I know a brilliant person, photographic memory, incredible mental ability, no people skills, no technical expertise, and there is great pride in not having these skills.  This person was promoted to the level of senior officer in the US military.  Who, during an inspection, wept uncontrollably when the plan went to pieces, machinery broke down, and the inspection failed.  This brilliant person could not speak to inferiors without an attitude of superiority cursing and reproach everyone and anyone.  Leaders, especially those placed in command through rank, must understand this communication principle and the power of this principle for good and ill.  Failure to communicate remains the sole variable upon which organizational cancer metastasizes into a full-blown case of organizational chaos leading to destruction (Dandira, 2012).

Rule 58:

Let your conversation be without malice or envy, for ‘tis a sign of tractable and commendable nature, and in all causes of passion permit reason to govern.

The above “rule” is a choice, rather two options.  The first choice is choosing to speak without malice and envy as a sign of your personal nature.  The second choice is to restrict passion.  Leaders only show emotion as a tool, not a weapon.  Conversation requires restricted passion to convey to the audience logic and confidence in the leader.

Rule 59:

Never express anything unbecoming, nor act against the rules before your inferiors.

I used to think this was common sense, and then I met two Chief Petty Officers (CPO’s) in the US Navy and discovered that common sense is not very common.  These two CPO’s remarked upon everything they saw, verbally spewing whatever occurred between their two ears, and were always examples of what not to do and how not to act.  Feeling their rank and position secure, these CPO’s then punished those who did not act in their manner severely and those who replicated their actions were rewarded and protected from the consequences.  With the result being that the followers exceeded the examples displayed by the CPO’s with noticeable results for morale, good order, and discipline.

Rule 65:

Speak not injurious words neither in jest nor in earnest; scoff at none although they give occasion.

I worked with a brilliant and incredible person who took a little time to learn and was very clumsy.  Once the topic being taught was then known, this individual knew that task and performed it in an exemplary manner.  Because of the clumsiness and time, it took to learn, this person was always the butt of his command’s jokes, jibes, insults, and was on every single petty detail possible, and performed those tasks poorly.  When respected, honest and sincerely praised, this person performed incredible feats.  The difference amazed and shocked his command and division, but did not silence these voices of derision to the detriment of the quality of work performed.  Did my friend give occasion to be laughed at, certainly!  Did he deserve to be laughed at, certainly not!  Leaders need to be doing better at controlling themselves and exemplifying the behaviors they desire to see in others.

Rule 67:

Detract not from others, neither be excessive in commanding.

While much of this rule can be considered to be part of Rule 65, detracting from others goes beyond verbal haranguing of Rule 65.  Detract is to reduce in value usually with the intent of making yourself larger.  Managers detract from their workers by taking credit for all the good and passing off all the blame.  Leaders attract the blame and detract the praise to the source.

The final aspect of this rule is necessary to understand, excessive commanding.  Commanding with excessive commands is nothing more than dominating in an authoritarian manner to the destruction of others.  Even commanding without excessive commands but with an attitude of domination can destroy.  Commanding well is an attitude of servitude coupled with a desire to build, grow, and develop people to meet their individual potential and doesn’t generally need commands, but always needs guidance or if you prefer, coaching.  Consider the life of a tree planted in good level ground.  The tree spends the first 10-15 years of life with a guide wire to help the tree grow straight.  Not a command and forced growth, but a guided growth into growing straight and true.  People are like the tree; the leader is like the guide wire, build people through guidance or coaching, not commands.

Rule 73:

Think before you speak; pronounce not imperfectly, nor bring out your words too hastily, but orderly and distinctly.

I was raised in a home where pronunciation and annunciation were as critical to speaking as spelling, grammar is to writing well, and the rules included proper and logical thinking, before speaking.  The process of communication is aided and abetted by properly pronouncing and announcing your words when speaking, after carefully thinking and crafting your desires into coherent thoughts.  In the US Army, I did not have trouble with my upbringing interfering with communication.  In the US Navy, I had nothing but problems with how I was raised interfering with communications.  One day, I spent 45-minutes being verbally upbraided by a second-class petty officer that choose to speak with no regard for the rules of the English Language, no understanding of grammar, and no logic, where Ebonics were displayed as a symbol of pride intended to confuse the receiver.  I was then referred to the CPO for not listening and being disrespectful.  I explained I could not understand what was being said and was told that my understanding of language is not his understanding of language and that I am in the wrong for not working harder to show empathy to a higher-ranking person.  Remember, the second-class petty officer chose, while on duty, to speak in a manner that intentionally could not be understood and always spoke in an understandable style when off duty.  If placed into a position of authority, managerial or leadership, that role comes the expectation of communication using logic, common rules of English pronunciation and annunciation, and proper grammar to ensure mutual understanding has the potential to be achieved.  When confusion in language occurs, it is the leaders, or managers, job to then rephrase and change language to meet the understanding of the listener.

These rules as mentioned form the bedrock upon which long and fruitful careers of leadership are built upon.  If weak in a particular rule, choose to obtain training and counsel in how to improve.  Find people exemplifying these rules and support them in their good works.  Train and develop those not employing these rules into better people, and our entire society improves.

References

Dandira, M. (2012). Dysfunctional leadership: Organizational cancer. Business Strategy Series, 13(4), 187-192. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17515631211246267

Washington, G. (2009). George Washington’s Rules of Civility (and decent behavior in company and conversation). Retrieved December 30, 2016, from http://www.digireads.com

© 2017 M. Dave Salisbury

All Rights Reserved

Psychology and Freud’s Fraud – Shifting the Paradigms on Freudian Value

As part of some recreational reading and additional inquiry for educational purposes, it has come to my attention there are some significant issues with Sigmund Freud, considered the father of modern psychology.  From the cocaine use to his deplorable methods of recording observations, from the religious cultism developed around Freudian thoughts to the lack of morals and responsibility inherent in Freud’s theories, Freud appears to me as a fraud.  I firmly believe that when psychology and all the attached sciences to psychology drop Freud into the dustbin of history, the science may finally advance.  Freud used solid marketing techniques to charm and bewilder the populations into accepting his ideals; but, as detailed by Kline (1984) due to a lack of viable alternatives, Freud became the default position to treat mental illness.

Psychotherapy, or for that matter any of the sciences of psychology, is dependent upon three key principles, the theories adopted by the therapist (Corbett, 2013), the intent of the patient/customer including the desire and the knowledge of the patient (American Psychological Association, 2012), and finally the relationship between the patient and the therapist (American Psychological Association, 2012).  Thus, trying to quantify or qualify psychotherapy remains amorphous due to the variables found in the foundational knowledge of the therapist, the human variable which remains volatile (Corbett, 2013), and the patient/therapist relationship. Two people can talk and never help each other; two people can talk and one can be manipulated by the other resulting in neither receiving advancement; and two people can talk and great strides in communication can achieve greatness, all depending upon the variables mentioned.

The American Psychoanalytic Association (2017) discusses how to manipulate the patient and influence the patient’s behavior stating categorically that manipulating the patient is “not necessarily negative (American Psychoanalytic Association, 2017).”  The following statistics are prevalent in the industry Freud built:

  • 40-50% of the patients seeking psychotherapy or psychological assistance receive no help by the therapy (Lilienfeld, 2007).
  • 10% of patients who sought psychological assistance were harmed, regardless of theories and theorists employed (Lilienfeld, 2007).
  • Smith (2012) suggests as many as 1/3 of the patients choosing or using pharmacological solutions to mental illness are improperly prescribed the medication and receive harm.
  • The rates of those harmed or who receive no help from psychology/psychotherapy has remained unchanged since tracking began.

Hossain and Karim (2013) provide another major aspect for consideration in understanding the confusion in psychosexuality and dysfunctional behavior, the plasticity of words employed by researchers and theorists.  Aleshire (2016) mentions this same problem, calling the problem one of “fluidity in terminology.”  For example, communication became ambiguous when the terms sex and gender became sufficiently muddled by community redefinition.  Words have meanings, and words should not be mutated, spindled, and torn from the bedrock foundation of their definitions.  Diamond (2002) provides simple definitions and reasoning for this discussion and a careful, and thorough understanding of the terminology is critical to communication.

Kline (1984) sets the stage for understanding psychoanalysis by defining psychoanalysis as, “… essentially the invention of Freud [pg. 1],” and Kline (1984) adds that psychoanalysis refers to a theoretical system of imagining the mind, recalling memories created through experience, and replaying those memories.  Conant (1947) stated conclusively the only reason Freud has not been rejected was because there was no viable alternative to Freudian theories (Kline, 1984, pg. 5).  Thus, concluding psychoanalytical perspective is left to the imagination of someone to create; more specifically, the industry Freud built was built upon Freud’s imagination, not actual science.

As an example of Freud’s fraudulent behavior, consider the following; from reading Hothersall (2015), it appears Freud is the first to confuse gender and sex, to make sex the ultimate pleasure, and project adult understandings of sex onto innocent children.  Diamond (2002) offers several definitions to aid the uninitiated in understanding sex, gender, and the current mess we are in with our current worldwide society and claims.  Sex is determined by either having gametes or receiving the same and is biologically tied.  Gender is the choice one makes to live as one determines in a socially diverse society, and this choice might or might not be tied to the traditional roles assigned by biology.  Hence, the stages of psychosexual development from Freud (Hothersall, 2015) are nullified by agency of the individual to progress, not a biological clock moving the individual through various ambiguous stages or levels of sexual identification.

Since gender depends upon societal roles and sex upon biology, I firmly disagree with Freud as applied to gender identity issues.  First and foremost, it appears that Freud was sexually frustrated and projected his adult views of behavior onto children and then tied pleasure to sex and perverted all types of thinking where child/adult relationships occur.  Second, gender identity is the choice of the individual in a society, if the society accepts multiple gender based roles.  That society then will deal with all the imaginations of the mind where gender choice is allowed and supported by legislation and social norms.

Finally, freedom to choose does not mean freedom from consequences, which cannot be chosen.  For example, I can choose to touch something hot, but cannot choose not to be burned.  How long I hold that hot item identifies how deeply the burn will be; thus, how long the hot item is held is a choice, but I cannot escape being burned by holding something hot.  There are always consequences for the choices made.

The significance of Freud on anything depends completely upon whether one believes Freud right or wrong.  Those, who consciously consider Freud to have value, will attempt to measure the content of cognitive thoughts, considered as remembrances from the world of illusion sometimes called dreams, apply a thin veneer of conscious thinking to the illusion, and attempt to draw out meaning.  For those who consider Freud a fraud, the entire discussion remains valueless and dreams are simply brain trash, images to entertain during rest, or some other fantasy to be disregarded by the conscious mind when awake.  This is a very real distinction as it forms the bias behind the conscious and subconscious value placed upon the argument.  Delanty & Strydom (2003) consider this argument crucial enough to include it in their discussion.  Freud (1920) realized his discussion regarding dreams and dream interpretation would not be valued by all, and in presenting this statement, Freud is prescient.

If dreams are pent up subconscious emotions (Freud, 1920, Chapter 1), one might try to increase one’s emotional intelligence to provide meaning and value.  Herein, Locke (2005) provides guidance on both the value of emotional intelligence and discusses mental processes in a manner worth understanding.  If Locke (2005) is correct, discussing these images, or pent up subconscious emotions, with another person (therapist, counselor, etc.), validates the other person’s emotional intelligence becoming a contributing factor in the valuation cycle of the dream, thus opening the door for misinterpretation due to the therapists personal bias’s and desire to make money.

Columbia College (2013), offers one final aspect to the fraudulent nature of Freud, namely, the removal of morals in decision-making and the inclusion of Darwin’s Theory.  Essentially, Freud claims that the mind holds ideas from the Stone Age, past lives, and aggressive and sexual desires are inherited traits that allowed man to move from the Stone Age to the Modern Age.  Hence, sexual behavior is nothing more than taking the God-like desires to lift and edify from man through procreation, replacing them with instinctual desires of a hunter/gatherer, and saying go forth without consequences, because your behaviors are not your own, but your distant relatives; to which I cannot help but proclaim, bunk!

I find myself wondering whether Freud required psychotherapy because he lacked the ability to tolerate disagreement with his theories and felt secure in creating religious cultism with his adherents, among many other traits and attributes arousing suspicion about his sanity and ability to think coherently.  Leading to a question regarding the religious and cult-like dogma of Freud, why is he still popular in the world of psychology?  Since Freud’s theories continue to be discounted as invalid, why is Freud taught in schools or referenced as a scientific thinker?  Freud is a fraud; it is time for him to be relegated to the trash heap of history!

References

Aleshire, M. E. (2016). Sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression: What are they? The Journal for Nurse Practitioners, 12(7), 329-330. doi: 10.1016/j.nurpra.2016.03.016

American Psychoanalytic Association. (2017). Psychoanalytic Theory & Approaches. Retrieved from http://www.apsa.org/content/psychoanalytic-theory-approaches

American Psychological Association. (2012, August). Recognition of psychotherapy effectiveness. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/about/policy/resolution-psychotherapy.aspx

Columbia College. (2013). Historical Context for the Writings of Sigmund Freud. Retrieved from https://www.college.columbia.edu/core/content/writings-sigmund-freud/context

Corbett, L. (2013, December 17). Psychotherapy based on depth psychology is a superior approach [Video file]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/e4JQamcq24c

Delanty, G., & Strydom, P. (Eds.). (2003). Philosophies of social science: The classic and contemporary readings. Philadelphia, PA: McGraw-Hill.

Diamond, M. (2002). Sex and gender are different: Sexual identity and gender identity are different. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 7(3), 320-334. doi:10.1177/1359104502007003031

Freud, S. (1920). Dream psychology. New York, New York: The James a McCann Company.

Hossain, D. M., & Karim, M. M. S. (2013). Postmodernism: Issues and problems. Asian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2(2), 173-181. Retrieved from http://www.ajssh.leena-luna.co.jp/AJSSHPDFs/Vol.2(2)/AJSSH2013(2.2-19).pdf

Hothersall, D. (2015). The history of clinical psychology and the development of psychoanalysis. In J. Hadley (Ed.), Psychoanalysis (pp. 2-53). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Available fromhttp://gcumedia.com/digital-resources/mcgraw-hill/2015/psychoanalysis-custom_ebook_1e.php

Kline, P. (1984).  Psychology and Freudian theory:  An introduction.  Routledge:  New Jersey.  (Kindle edition)

Lilienfeld, S. (2007). Psychological Treatments That Cause Harm. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2(1), 53-70. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40212335

Locke, E. A. (2005). Why emotional intelligence is an invalid concept. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 425-431. doi: 10.1002/job.318

Smith, B. L. (2012). Inappropriate prescribing. Monitor on Psychology, 43(6), 36. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/06/prescribing.aspx

© 2017 M. Dave Salisbury

All Rights Reserved

 

SMART Training –Shifting the Paradigm on Corporate Training

GearsCorporate training continues to be a difficult topic to describe, mainly because everyone seems to “know” what training is, but cannot understand what it is not, even when receiving inferior corporate training. As an adult educator, schooled and experienced in corporate training, let’s discuss corporate training, the principles, the need, and the student.

One aspect of organizational development needs to be considered at the outset, the difference between active and reflective listening. In active listening, the person not currently speaking pays attention to content and intent, engages in emotional meaning, focuses on removing barriers, and remains non-judgmental and empathetic. In reflective listening, the speaker and the listener take active listening and employ two-directional messaging to ensure mutual understanding. The central aim in reflective listening will always be the desire to achieve mutual understanding in communication.

The importance of understanding listening in training remains the utmost concern as the process of engaged, reflective listening producing the environment for the most potential positive training results. The needed 360-degree or two-directional communication to safely and more efficiently operate is critical in training and necessary in communication. Trainers must be able to gather anecdotal evidence and hard data to check for validity and veracity in training operations. Without a quality control mechanism that includes open and honest feedback, the trainer is operating in a vacuum and wasting corporate resources.

The majority of adult educators in the US today, and possibly much of the world, have become convinced of several untruths because the colleges teaching adult education seem fixated on teaching misleading concepts that ultimately do more harm than good. For example, ADDIE, as a methodology tool used to govern training, is useless without a quality control and a return and report function, both of which must be added to the basic ADDIE model; thus changing the design and interposing more personal opinion and bias into what became, with the addition of quality control and two-directional communication, an untested model. Colleges continue to press the ADDIE methodology as the only proper method for instructing adults, without changing or testing the basic ADDIE model. Other untruths include Maslow’s “Hierarchy of Needs,” which has been researched and found not entirely accurate, nor does it explain the natural needs and the current model of the world; thus, remaining just Maslow’s opinion.

By teaching untruths to the soon-to-be-adult educators, the adult educators go forth professionally to train other adults, using the same untruths. Thus fulfilling the axiom of GIGO, programmer’s aphorism meaning, “Garbage In results in Garbage Out.” Hence, the untruths are disseminated into future classrooms, and the company and the adult students lack proper training, resources are wasted, and the potential in training is lost.

Putting the value of training in dollars and cents is difficult, but the following will give an idea of the problem. Two kinds of money govern business, blue and green. Blue money is all about the potentblue-moneyial for good or ill to the bottom line of an action, process, tool, employee, etc. Green money is cold, hard, cash, and the food of bottom line health. What is the potential of cross-training employees? If done properly, incalculable positive results and consequences are forthcoming. If done incorrectly, immeasurable adverse effects and consequences will abound. Leading to a stunning observation; if enough blue money is burned, green money evaporates, and the business leaders have no idea how or why the bottom line is vanishing, and market share is shrinking. Since training is all about increasing an employee’s potential and runs the risk of the employee leaving the company, the potential costs and benefits remain difficult to quantify in dollars and cents.

As a newly hired operations manager, I made three expensive presumptions: 1. All the production employees were cross-trained. 2. The machine maintenance had been done properly, and the production machines were in top order. 3. The production employees knew the jobs they were being paid to accomplish. The presumptions cost a lot of blue and green money until rectified, which cost the plant valuable production time, temporary staff increased costs, and the need to perform the production floor manager’s position as well as the operations manager’s role until these three presumptions were corrected. Total cost from my hire date until resolved, 3-months of 50-hour weeks, and more than triple my annual salary in green money. With the total savings from higher potential after addressing the deficiencies, the annual salary of every employee in the plant multiplied by five.

Leading to how to increase potential, decrease blue money evaporation, and develop SMART Training, I have found the following ideas helpful to consider in creating hybrid solutions:

  1. Quantify and Qualify blue money loss. This sounds technical but is quite easy to implement.   I suggest the following principles for review and application:
    1. Respect those around you as potential superstars. Respecting includes employees or customers, vendors or shareholders, deemed less useful. Respect first, last, and always. People will always rise to the level of respect shown.
    2. Change your perception. How valuable or costly is a hammer when directly proportionate to the amount of training in the hands of the operator? If you, as the business leader, are not willing to change how you see the hammer, then it will be impossible to see the worker differently.
    3. Focus on people. Processes are how work is accomplished. Products and services support the company, but the people remain the variable requiring attention. Get out of the office, get onto the production floor, interact, ask questions, and know people.
    4. Freedom to act is a blue money saving principle. If the actions taken by individuals are rigidly controlled, the customer is not served, the problems multiply, and the result is wasted potential. Remember, for every dollar in potential money spent, five dollars in cash evaporates.
  2. Believe in cross training. It is said that Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines love to train. They might grumble, moan, and complain, but the training helps lift the morale, empowers the individual, and enhances the individual self-image and self-worth. The same is true in business and every other human endeavor; embrace a love for training.
  3. In accordance with item two above, make sure that the training is valuable and SMART. Relevant training is a knowledge object that can be used immediately, often, and is easily recognized by other employees as something to aspire to obtain.
    1. SMART training is specific; if the employee is to be a cashier, do not include forklift training with cashier training.
    2. Measurable, can the employee feel they learned a job-ready skill. Attainable training is training that can be achieved. For example, not everyone needs to be a nuclear physicist to perform well in customer interactions. Scale the training to meet the tasks at hand. Yes, training should be tough, but attainable.
    3. Realistic training is directly applicable to daily tasks, not trying to cover 20-years of hypothetical nuance, but realistic to daily production goals.
    4. Timely training means to train the employee to the job standard, as it is designed currently, not 5-10 months down the road.
  4. Training has a shelf life; thus training must adapt and change as the business changes. Allow training to live and die as needed to meet the business needs. This also requires cognizant and purposeful planning for strategic and tactical goal realization. Nothing is worse than receiving training in a classroom, then needing to receive different training on the floor because the trainers do not know current operations.
  5. Organizational design. This topic seems peculiar to mention in an article regarding training, but please note, many times, the disconnect between training and operations is not the training or operations, but how the organization is designed. An example, during a project recently concluded, I saw this principle first hand; a common theme on the production floor was a feeling of disconnect between higher levels, e.g. director level and up leadership and senior manager level direction and down. Because of the perceived disconnect, e.g. front-line employees thinking and feeling the higher level leaders are not interested and engaged, and the real disconnect, e.g. the leaders changing methods of work without understanding the processes, procedures, and technology in the work performed, many problems on the floor were never discussed and resolved, simply Band-Aid solutions applied with the hope the core problem goes away, while complaining that the leaders did not have a clue. Use the following to improve organizational design concerns:
    1. Problems in organizational design are easy to spot and discern during process reviews; this is a valuable time; use it well. Thus, never let a process age beyond 18-months and always ensure each process has a single individual responsible for the shelf life of the process.
    2. Use the quarterly, semi-annual, and annual employee events to listen to employees, talk with staff, and take these thoughts back to strategic and tactical planning meetings to direct resources to qualify and quantify the comments from employees, then act promptly, and keep the employees in the communication loop.
    3. Stop the Band-Aid solutions. If the problem needs a Band-Aid, the problem is bad enough to invest actual time and resources in fixing properly. Communicate using reflective listening to achieve two-directional communication with mutual understanding.blue-money-burning
  6. The student in corporate training can be the customer, a shareholder, a vendor, another employee, etc. Training should be an ongoing topic looked forward to as an enabling event. Want to quickly see if the training is SMART? Listen to the comments made by employees when annual compliance training is announced. If there remains a monumental lack of enthusiasm, training is not SMART, not valuable, and blue money fire pits are raging, burning potential directly and green money by remote. Hence, the following tips should help in understanding the student more completely:
    1. Regardless of mode, make sure the student is known before training occurs. Knowing the student ensures the proper language is employed in offering training, and the trainer and the student can relate to each other and the topic under discussion.
    2. Know what the student expects to receive from the training and then adapt the training to meet the expectation. Even if the student does not know what they desire in post training, allow the student to vocalize and establish expectations.
    3. Confidence in training comes from trainers knowing who they are and what they offer. If teachers are not confident, students will never be confident and will have been taught how not to be confident in acting upon the training principles.
    4. “Enthusiasm,” per Henry Chester, “is the greatest asset in the world. Enthusiasm “beats money, power, and influence.” Enthusiasm is sourced in confidence and trust. Faith in the topic is acquired by being trained and trusting in the application and organizational design to support the issue being taught. Enthusiasm is easily taught; teach by example and others will follow!

Employ voice-of-the-customer (VoC) surveys more completely. Make a team of highly professional, and soon to be promoted to team leader, employees and have them administer the VoC program. Employ the VoC as a tool to improve the business processes, procedures, and organizational design. Possessing inputs for training topics, directing customer interaction resources for marketing, and understanding the role of potential (blue money) inherent in the business products and services, as well as the employees delivering on the company promise for customer interaction, improves the business processes, procedures, and organizational design. By employing seasoned employees, the VoC becomes an organizational tool worthy of the customer and the cost of collecting the customer’s input.

There remains a great need in business for SMART training, which includes realizing the potential in people and processes to influence for good or ill. Tooblue-money-burning-2 often the problem in lost bottom-line or dropping market share is not found in green money costs but in blue money waste. When costs need cutting, always look first for lost potential and save the potential first. If the potential waste is not stopped first, the blue money will continue to burn and will morph into different budget areas because the potential lost is a raging forest fire untended and burning green money.

© 2017 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
Copyright for images used is retained by the original creator and used under fair use.

Leadership is Teaching: The Corporate Training Paradox

Training in Corporate America is at a crossroads; due to the pressures of training adults who have been failed by public education (Badke, 2009), the costs of training are skyrocketing, even as technology investments are paying huge dividends. Informational illiteracy is hampering training initiatives, slowing productivity, and decreasing returns on human capital development. Not knowing how to find data, use data, and evaluate data, is frustrating the learning processes and is hidden from view in our current corporate societies. This paper is going to briefly discuss the parameters of the problem and outline a simple solution.

Leadership Means Teaching

Every organization has a problem similar to this scenario. Employee A has been through corporate training for their job. They complete their job with very little supervision and are known as resident subject matter experts. Employee B has also completed corporate training and has tasks similar to Employee A, but Employee B uses Employee A for answers to all questions and concerns while performing their daily tasks. Employee B and A have both received the same training, have access to the same sources for information, but what is the difference and why the disparity. The disparity is found in information literacy and can be answered with a simple question: “Is Employee B informationally literate and comfortable using the resources provided?” Why the disparity if the answer is yes? If the answer is no, what training program is capable or available for teaching information literacy? If Employee A and B have been employed for the same amount of time, the productivity lost by both employees has burned through tremendous amounts of potential money or ‘blue money’ and the organization is not seeing a return on investment (ROI) for either employee.

Information Literacy, as defined by Plattsburgh State University of New York (P-SUNY), Plattsburgh State Information and Computer Literacy Task Force, (2001), is “… the ability to recognize the extent and nature of an information need, then to locate, evaluate, and effectively use the needed information (Heller-Ross, 2012, Para 1).” As the supervisor, team leader, organizational leadership, evaluating sources and training others are inseparably connected to ROI and human capital development. The problem is many people are missing these skills, and corporate training is not covering how to adapt to the knowledge dearth.

Russell (2009) proclaims that even at the secondary school level it is to late to teach this skill set, except corporate training has never even addressed the problem and the same age as entrance into college is the same age as new hires in corporate entry-level positions. While Russell claims this skill set must be taught in lower grade educational settings, this does not address the current educational lack. If P-SUNY is correct that this skill set is “needed information,” and Ms. Russell is also correct that by the time the individual reaches college age it is too late to teach this skill set, where and how does corporate training meet the needs of the organization to train employees on information literacy?

The current corporate culture is defined by Myron Tribus (2008) as a “Knowing Society.” This means it is not acceptable to not know something or the person caught not being fully informed is perceived as less than useful and will be terminated. Tribus talks about changing into a “Learning Society” where it is acceptable and encouraged to not know everything and ask questions. This ‘learning society’ would foster training as a leadership function, and the solution for information illiteracy would be to train with supervisors instead of resident knowledge experts. Burpitt (2009) talks about this occurrence as exploiting the effectiveness of transformational leadership, or as Tribus puts it, “… [Leaders] must practice what they preach. ‘Don’t say “follow me, I ‘m behind you all the way.” It makes everyone go in circles’ (Tribus, 2008, pg 3).”

Corporate Training Requires Knowing

            Badke (2009) mentions three steps to begin visualizing the problem and through visualizing the problem, individual solutions reach achievability. These steps are “1. Rethink everything, 2. Stop making informational literacy remedial, and 3. Conquer the blindness (Badke, 2009, pg 49).” Instead of re-inventing the wheel, Turusheva (2009) has provided a framework to utilize. The framework rests inside the already developed and tested ‘Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education’ published by the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL). These standards can form a basic test for corporate trainers to deliver. If an employee meets the proficient level, they do not need more formal information literacy training, although they can take a course if the space is available and the needs of the company dictate. If the employee does not meet the proficient level, organize these employees into a class and offer official training in informational literacy. The ACRL standards include efficiency and effectiveness in finding data and then using that data, thus making these standards applicable for corporate organizations to incorporate into their training regimes. Since data use contains legal, ethical, and social dimensions, the ACRL includes this as a standard, thus adding a level of protection to the corporation when many employees have Internet access for company business. Corporate training requires knowing how to address problems, seeing deficiencies, and meeting those deficiencies with sound training and inspiring learners to learn the needed skills to be successful.

Conclusion

            The ideas outlined above should not be considered remedial, in “rethinking everything” and “conquering the blindness (Badke, 2009, pg 49).” The number one factor must be stressed; this is a needed skill set for the position. Stress the need for the corporate society to always be one where being willing to learn is honored and not knowing means a learning opportunity. Informational illiteracy is almost as bad as illiteracy or not knowing how to read. If a person cannot evaluate data in our current technological society, that person is handicapped and the restrictions have been placed upon that person by their education. An employee who knows how to think, find answers, and solve problems is an employee like Employee A from the scenario and one that needs to be incentivized to remain employed. Knowing how to find data, evaluate that data, and then apply that data is a skill set which can be taught, learned, and fostered in an organization which values their employees.

References

Badke, W. (2009, Jul/Aug). How we failed the NET generation. Online, 47-49.

Burpitt, W. (2009). Exploration versus exploitation: Leadership and the paradox of administration. Institute of Behavioral and Applied Management, 227 – 245.

Heller-Ross, H. (2012). Information literacy: a critical skill and a strategic commitment. Retrieved from http://www.plattsburgh.edu/library/instruction/informationliteracydefinition.php

Russell, P. (2009). Why universities need information literacy now more than ever. Feliciter, 55(3), 92-94.

Tribus, M. (2008). Changing the Corporate Culture Some Rules and Tools. Retrieved March 16, 2009 from: Changing the Corporate Culture Some Rules and Tools Web site: http://deming.eng.clemson.edu/den/change_cult.pdf

Turusheva, L. (2009). Students’ information competence and its importance for life-long education. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 12, 126-132.

© 2015 M. Dave Salisbury

All Rights Reserved