Archive for the ‘Archive’ Category

I saw Fisher and Paykel on Close Up talking about their offshore factories. Andrew Paykel stated he was “quite concerned” about the quality issues of some of the products. I am experiencing cognitive dissonance because what I see (an executive state he is quite concerned about a problem) and what I have experienced (see my blogs 9 and 14 February where my dishdrawer broke down and my email to the customer care centre has not been responded to) are completely different. And why is an executive only “quite” concerned? Shouldn’t he be “very” concerned? Wouldn’t it be better to be on the tv sharing your great products (Apple with the Ipad) rather than to try and justify that problems are being sorted. And … still waiting for a reply to my email from the Customer Care Centre – fortunately I didn’t hold my breath.

The stupidity at times, amazes even me.

I stay in a particular hotel in Auckland (which I won’t name as a client books it for me) about one week a month, so approximately 50-60 days a year. Now, that is a pretty good occupancy for them.

I leave my toothbrush charger in the bathroom. Imagine if the next day I received it in the post from the hotel with a note. Imagine how pleased I would have been, and how much I would have appreciated their service and thoughtfulness. Simple stuff, but of course, that is not what happened.

Four days later my toothbrush needs charging and, upon looking for the charger, I realise that I left it in the hotel. I email them and, here is the good part, they respond within 24 hours saying, that indeed, they have it. Now, my immediate reaction is, why on earth did no one contact me given that they had my contact details and must have known it was mine? Why was it up to me to email them and, if I hadn’t realised that is where I left it, would have spent about $200 buying another one? Absolutely bewildering. It gets worse – they are charging me to post it back! Fifty to sixty nights a year and they are going to charge me $10 (I hope no more) to post it back. It gets even worse. They won’t post it unless I send authorisation to debit my credit card (clearly high bureaucracy and zero trust for a regular guest). So, now I have to fill in a form, scan it and email it back, a whole 10 minutes of activity to rub salt into the wound.

Here is a hotel with posters about their service and values plastered all over the lifts, not telling me I have left something behind and waiting for me to phone them (presumably throwing it out if I don’t), charging me $10 to post it back, and making me fill in a form. Would you recommend this hotel to anyone? I certainly won’t be. Textbook dumb arse management!

Back in May, Andy Haden made some egregious comments. Earlier this week, he made more egregious comments. This time he went, and voluntarily at that. This was 2 months too late. Where was the leadership to swiftly act on this? Serious values digressions are rarely one-offs and are usually indicative of a pattern of responding (we only heard two public comments – goodness knows what was said elsewhere). If you don’t deal with values digressions swiftly, they’ll end up being just propaganda on the office walls – and we all know places where this occurs. Values are not just about winning the game, they are about how you win the game. How are you winning yours?

Was again at Eden Park. Jeff kindly took me for another look around. These photos were taken from the coaching box.

You may be aware of the tunnel being built in Victoria Park in Auckland (http://www.aucklandcity.govt.nz/news/council/200908/23/a04.asp) . Last year when I was there it was a large paddock with a few trucks and several guys – slightly different now!

Read this online earlier this morning – somewhat interesting. If you have a bullying issue, then you have a values issue and, as I stated a couple of posts earlier, they do not go away by themselves.

Banish Bullies from Work

Last updated 10:30 02/08/2010

Bullying is a major problem in New Zealand workplaces and it’s time employers woke up to it, says one employment law specialist.

Barbara Buckett, of Wellington firm Barbara Buckett and Associates, says bullying can sometimes be considered part of the culture of an organisation and deemed to be acceptable behaviour.

But Ms Buckett says a recent case in Australia where a cafe owner was fined A$220,000 (NZ$270,470) for failing to provide a safe working environment is also a warning to New Zealand employers.

“While the level of fines may not be as high here, it is a wake-up call for employers,” she says.

Many employers may not be aware they can be fined up to $250,000 under New Zealand health and safety in employment legislation for unsafe workplaces and hazards in the workplace. Bullying can also be considered as harassment under the Human Rights Act, and could cost an employer a maximum $200,000 fine.

And it could also be considered as a breach of contract where the contract specifies the right to a safe working environment. An employee has the right to refuse to work where there is a health and safety issue, Ms Buckett says.

“Apart from the potential fines and penalties, there is no doubt bullying is costly – it affects health, demoralises, negatively affects productivity, staff morale, staff turnover and employee satisfaction, causes absenteeism and generally has a negative impact on the organisation and its business. It is insidious and unacceptable.”

Recent figures from a university survey, commissioned by the Department of Labour, show nearly one in five New Zealand workers are bullied at work, one of the worst rates in the world.

A joint research team from Auckland, Waikato, Massey and London polled more than 1700 workers from the health, education, hospitality and travel sectors asking how often they were exposed to “negative acts” at work.

Overall, 17.5 per cent of respondents were identified as victims of bullying. The range was five to 20 per cent.

In the Australian case, persistent bullying at work led to the suicide of a waitress and resulted in a successful prosecution of not only the cafe owner, but the company and its three employees.

The bullying consisted of both mental and physical abuse of the waitress by co- workers. They called her fat, ugly, stupid and a whore. They spat on her, gossiped about her, taunted her about a failed earlier suicide attempt and poured fish oil on her bag and clothes.

The owner was aware but did nothing to prevent it happening. Under the Australian Health and Safety legislation the cafe owner was fined A$220,000 while the three employees were each fined between $10,000 and $45,000.

Though the Australian case is extreme, Ms Buckett says a similar situation could present itself here if employers don’t stamp it out.

“Recent tragic consequences from schoolyard bullying are a testimony to how fatal and severe the consequences can be.” Whether employers realise it or not, Ms Buckett says they, as an organisation, bear the responsibility for the systematic destruction of another.

She encourages employers to use the helpline 0800 0 BULLY, specifically set up to offer advice to organisations seeking to provide a bully-free workplace.

Under New Zealand law employers must provide a safe and healthy workplace and all complaints about bullying should be taken seriously and investigated, she says.

All workplaces should also have policies identifying unacceptable behaviours and should specifically target bullying.

What constitutes bullying is not defined and is a matter of fact and degree – what is acceptable in one case may not be in another and workplace banter or strident management normally won’t come within the definition, Ms Buckett says.

A one-off situation won’t usually constitute bullying – what is generally accepted as bullying is repeated unwanted and unwarranted behaviour which has the effect of humiliating, intimidating and degrading a person, she says.

Bullying can be verbal or physical abuse, such as name calling, offensive language, unflattering names, blaming, unjust treatment, shouting, cursing, slamming, throwing, rudeness, dishonesty, threats of violence, unfair and different treatment, unfair and constant criticism, alienation, unreasonable, refusing leave, work overload, publicly humiliating and belittling remarks, teasing, cruel and intentionally hurtful remarks and hostility.

While we know that spelling isn’t an indicator of intelligence (Horn, 1960), we should, and do, place judgments on dumbed-down or plainly incorrect language and spelling. If you don’t believe me, tell me how you would feel dropping your kids off outside this school.

A road contractor hired to paint the word “school” on a freshly paved stretch of road near Southern Guilford High School in North Carolina rendered the traffic area in question in a “shcool” zone.

Yesterday I gave a guest lecture on feedback to about 200 Stage 3 students at the University of Canterbury. It was good to be back sharing a topic I love, and to a group of people who are at the beginning of their careers – oh the possibilities! They asked some great questions, and they remained awake in a mid afternoon lecture – success.

In 1967, Peter Drucker wrote, “Another common time-waster is malorganization. Its symptom is an excess of meetings.”  Personally, I have never met an executive who hasn’t been able to decrease the number of meetings they attend by at least 25% (note the “at least,” as that is conservative). Here is an article I read on the web this morning. Not much has changed.

NZ managers think meetings waste time

New Zealand managers think one quarter of the meetings they go to achieve nothing but waste time , a survey by a recruitment company suggests.

From 207 finance, accounting, human resources and executive-level managers surveyed, the Robert Half survey found the main reason for ill-will towards meetings was lack of focus, with people talking about topics other than the issues they had come to discuss.

The global survey collected data from 6100 managers in 20 countries.

The New Zealand managers surveyed often didn’t know what they had been called there for, or felt meetings were being attended by people who didn’t need to be there.

The survey on time-wastefulness was led by Swiss managers, who thought 38.8 percent of their meetings were a waste of time, followed by the Spanish, at 38.4 percent.

Australian managers deemed 34.5 percent of meetings a waste of time, citing the same reason as their New Zealand counterparts — lack of focus.

The lowest percentage of unnecessary meetings was reported in Luxembourg, at 13.7 percent, and Dubai, at 16.9 percent.

All surveys carried out by Robert Half suggested staff were more stressed and under more pressure to achieve more with fewer resources, senior manager Megan Alexander said.

“At some companies, meetings become such a habit that no one stops to ask whether there’s even still a compelling reason to hold them. But now is the perfect time to re-evaluate your meeting schedule and analyse which ones are really necessary, and which are not the most efficient use of resources,” she said.

– NZPA