One Red Hot Country Mama!

In a December Wall Street Journal piece, Journalist Joseph Rago takes a pot shot at bloggers, saying that everything we do is simply a derivative of what the mainstream media does:

The blogs are not as significant as their self-endeared curators would like to think. Journalism requires journalists, who are at least fitfully confronting the digital age. The bloggers, for their part, produce minimal reportage. Instead, they ride along with the MSM like remora fish on the bellies of sharks, picking at the scraps.

I understand what he is saying. Yet, in order to get traffic and interest in their sites, most bloggers know that writing on current events, rather than individual events is most effective. In my experience, the more I talk about current events, famous people or books, the more I get Googled and the more subscribers I get.

You can see here for example, that Chris Brogen from Lifehack  says that the best way to rank well is to be connected to other sites. You can also see here, a complaint that some bloggers set conversations, and others write based on those topics. I suspect that this has something to do with promoting blogs through linkbacks to and comments on other blogs. So, perhaps in order to survive in the early days and get our words read, like the remora fish bloggers have to grab onto those sharks – whether we want to or not.

I was perusing around the bookstore last night and saw that Dr. Phil’s wife, Robin Mcgraw has a book out called Inside My Heart. I picked it up, read the back, and saw that it mentioned her husband quite a few times for example:

She shares with you the life-changing moments of her childhood years, dating and marrying Dr. Phil McGraw, raising two sons, and asserting herself as a woman in a man’s world to show you that you have the power to make choices in your life.

Does Dr. Phil have "dating and marrying Robin" as a key point on the back of his books? No. I sincerely doubt that Robin would be on the New York Times Bestsellers if it wasn’t for her husband’s career. So – there it is. Dr. Phil is a famous psychologist and author with several books, and Robin is a mini-version of that success with one book.

There is also Heather Reisman, the CEO of Chapters/Indigo, which is a beloved book chain here in Canada. She is married to businessman Gerald Schwartz, Chair and CEO of Onex Corporation. If it wasn’t for Gerald buying out Chapters a few years ago, it is doubtful that Heather would be where she is today. Meanwhile, she is trumpeted as one of the great Canadian women in business. But really, she is just a derivative of her husband’s success… she is his sidekick, his "buddy".

I am not saying that these women are not hard-workers or that they are not talented. I just think that they would not be where they are without their husband’s successes… so Robin for example, is the "first wife" of pop-psychology rather than standing on her own.

This phenomenon is portrayed in too many movies to mention – where the men are the main characters, and the woman is a smaller sidekick/love-interest. In fact, I read somewhere that one reason why women in movies are so small, skinny and usually play supporting roles is because they are seen as "a buddy" to the man, and not stealing the spotlight from him by being stronger or smarter. What kind of role-model is this for young women? 

The great news is… there are many more role models – great women who do not have derivative success. They  are strong unto themselves… and an inspiration to women everywhere. I believe that these are the ones that should be celebrated and held up as examples. Some that inspire me are: Xerox CEO Anne Mulcahy, Joni Mitchell (for writing her own songs and inspiring tons of musicians), Oprah Winfrey, Martha Stewart, Ani DiFranco, Madonna, my sister Lara, my friend Lori in Vancouver etc. These are just the ones I can think of this morning. They crashed up against the world’s challenges and came out on top, instead of needing to ride on the coat-tails of a man… or needing to be smaller, skinnier and in a supporting role. They are happy to steal the spotlight.

That being said, 99% of CEOs are still men and 90% of Receptionists and Admin Assistants are still women, representing the top and bottom of the corporate ladder. So it’s not saying that "if only these women tried harder, they could be Oprahs too". It is also not saying that they are inherently not capable. So… what is it saying?

It is impossible to predict the future. In career, love and family life, you can open yourself up to the possibility for success, but you cannot guarantee the outcome. I was talking to Steve (the guy I have been dating since October) about this the other night over dinner… He said that no matter what the outcome is, it is good. Although the idea is not that original, sometimes hearing the right thing at the right time really makes it click.

For example, I can only have a great business idea and promote it to the extent that it has the possibility of success – but I can’t guarantee it will thrive. If it doesn’t succeed, that outcome is fine; I can learn from that experience and move on or I can modify my strategy. I can only help my friend who is having a difficult time in her relationship so she has the possibility of working it out – but I can’t make it work for her (even though it is so hard for me to see her in pain). If it doesn’t work out for her that outcome is fine; I can still listen to her and help her so that she has the possibility of moving on.

This way of thinking helps takes the fear out of reaching for our goals. I think that most of us can’t imagine life without that special relationship/job/possession/habit. But in truth even if we lose those things, we will still be ourselves, and somehow we will find a way to be fine. I think that this is a good mix of optimism and realism. It helps me stay positive while pursuing my wishes and dreams at the same time as realistically assessing and overcoming obstacles.

I read somewhere that the key to charisma is not to be more interesting than everyone else or to have the best stories. No… it is about making the other person feel special. It is exactly the opposite of conventional theory…. putting someone else before you in order to make you look good is counter-intuitive but it works.

During my MBA we studied survey by Kouzes and Posner which asked followers what the characteristics were that they most admired in a leader. The results came out as:

• Honesty
• Inspiring
• Forward-looking
• Competent
• Fair Minded
• Supportive

The lowest-ranking characteristics of a leader were:

• Independent
• Self-centered
• Loyal
• Ambitious
• Determined
• Mature

In looking at the list, all of the ambitious, determined and self-centered behavior a la Donald Trump The Apprentice does not build the best leader. We replicated this study in our class, and we came out with a very similar list. Basically, people want their leaders to satisfy their needs, such as inspiring them, supporting them or being fair in times of conflict. Independence, ambition, and determination may be the individual characteristics that advance an individual to leadership, but ultimately being a great leader stems from satisfying the follower’s needs. In other words, what drives us as individuals is not what our followers are looking for in a leader.

I find this theory very practical and applicable. I also like the idea of a new generation of leaders who drive to inspire instead of going after their own self-centered goals. Yes, I know this may not be a realistic scenario based on how most people become leaders, but it is nice, shiny ideal to strive for.

Many managers want to just have eyes, brains and a mouth – they want to examine the problem, recommend a solution and magically transform their vision into reality with no work. Then they want to talk about how successful their project was to anyone who will listen. Maybe we all want that, but the best managers know better. They have hands, ears and a heart. They jump in and work along-side everyone else when necessary, they listen to those around them, and they have passion for the projects that they are working on. I am not saying this theoretically, I am saying this as a practitioner – I have been a project manager for 6 years and managed dozens of creative and technical initiatives for companies large and small.

Hands – Pitch in when Necessary

The worst project managers sit on the sidelines and call only when they need something… last minute. They think that managing is not actually doing, but instead it is only sitting in the stands, watching and critiquing. When things go wrong, they look for someone to blame instead of taking action to solve the problem. I had an American manager like this – he needed to control me but did not really understand what I was doing. As a result, every time we met he made dramatic decisions so none of my traffic acquisition strategies had time to work. Each time they were getting off the ground – he wanted to try something else.  Managers like this tend to make sweeping decisions that cause a lot of work for the people below them since they are unfamiliar with the project or they don’t really care.

Project Management is never hands-free. There is the work of setting up schedules, of adjusting them when necessary and of making sure that you have the right people working on the right things. There is the responsibility of meeting with people regularly (not necessarily round-table or formal, but having the conversation) to make sure everything is on track and nothing unexpected has come up.

Ears – Listen to Those Around You

A good manager listens to the people around them, no matter what level they may be. I worked with a manager who was not very sure of herself when it came to the technical side of her projects. As a result, she saw any question as a challenge to her abilities and stubbornly resisted input. As a result, her projects turned out to be much more rudimentary than if she simply listened to her technical team.

Listening is valuable because it helps you avoid mistakes and get creative input. It is not being ordered around. Let’s face it – the people working on the project have a vested interest in making their own lives as easy as possible so their suggestions could come only from self-interest. Instead of taking orders, it is sitting back like a judge and taking in all of the points of view as a way to gather evidence – then reaching your own conclusion based on a certain criteria.

Heart – Passion for What You Are Doing

First of all, if you have someone who is talented on your team – tell them that they are great at every opportunity. This is especially good for creatives (such as writers or designers) because giving them credit makes them more comfortable to take more creative risks. Don’t fake it when they are not since you don’t want an untalented person to take risks. If you are stuck with them be polite. If you have the freedom to find someone else, do that.

Being genuinely passionate about your projects is a huge motivating force. It makes it more fun for people to work with you and they won’t avoid your calls as much. I have always been a manager with a lot of passion – both with enthusiasm and frustration… until now. Lately I have been less inspired. I have less strategic and creative input into my projects and a lot of the work is simply making local copies of something someone else already implemented. Also I am managed rather closely by my direct report. These are all things that take the heart out of a manager – so if you are working with a project manager temporarily without passion – don’t blame them! Maybe it isn’t their fault. Passion is something difficult to maintain and it has to come from a genuine place. To resolve it, I am focusing my energy on the one project that is exciting, and potentially impactful – and maybe success there will allow me to do the more fulfilling projects that I am interested in.

Technorati Profile