Why are they here?

If you’ve ever worked for an organization with more than one person, you’ve had someone there complaining about how terrible working for the company is, what things are wrong and that nothing ever changes. You then find yourself, naively, giving that person an audience, probing more and finding some specific change to implement.

You feel good. You are about to do what no one has done before, and everyone is going to praise you for it.

You boldly stride into the office and announce the big change, waiting for the applause. But it never comes. Instead, your primary squawker promptly informs you it will never work. You meekly ask for people to simply try it. For a little while. Maybe.

They don’t. And your squawker now has yet another thing to complain about not changing. Of course, that person was the ringleader in sabotaging it. But that is beside the point.

Here is the sadly amusing part in all of it. That person is still working there.

Yes, for all the documentation, all the complaining, all the problems, in general managers tend to keep negative people employed. There can be any number of excuses, which I won’t offer here.

Only one thing matters. If you are not achieving your mission, whatever it may be, and those people continue to exist in your organization, then you only have yourself to blame for wallowing in mediocrity.

Take comfort in knowing that you are not the only one dealing with this. Wharton and McKinsey each wrote articles along a similar vein last Spring.

What needs to happen is clear. As the manager/president/owner of the organization, you must rid yourself of the negativity and place the organization in the best possible position to succeed. Whatever talent those individuals might have, their cruddy attitude destroys it.

:: :: ::

Insurers Need to Serve Not Profit

Having left my previous employment and struck out on my own, I now face the unfortunate reality of searching for affordable individual health insurance. Filling out the application requires an idiot-savant-like capability to remember every last medical detail for my family from the last 5 or more years. And the follow-up call from the underwriter gives me a clear sense of what coverage they want to avoid as a pre-existing condition.

I know that those doing the insuring seek to minimize risk. That’s why they would prefer to insure large groups. (They’ll happily insure individuals, too, up to a point and for a price. ) Don’t get me wrong. I can understand minimizing risk. Heck, that’s why people by insurance – minimize their personal risk by putting it on someone else, namely an insurance company.

What gets me is minimizing risk for the sake of increasing profits. Based on my experience, though I know I am not the only one, insurance companies come off as wanting to collect premiums without ever having to pay it back. It is a complete disregard for the insureds motivated by a desire to please the investors. (See my post “Why I Hate My Mortgage Company” on The Paddlewheel blog for similar discussion.)

The earliest forms of insurance were based on neighbors helping neighbors, serving each other as part of a community. That is the model we need. Not just for health insurance but for all types.

It’s not a difficult proposition, especially when you take a long-term view:

• Guarantee coverage, even for pre-existing conditions and location hazards
• Help mitigate risk through education and discounts
• Pay people on time(if not early); don’t hold on to the money
• Treat your customers and payees like you actually care about them
• Charge a fair premium, even if it is not the lowest

When people receive great service and believe they are treated fairly, they tend to be loyal and recruit other customers. Insurers driven by mission and not profit will truly serve their customers. And in the long run they will see greater success.

:: :: ::

Admit when You’re Wrong

The week before Christmas, a New Orleans man implicated in an armed robbery from October, was released from prison. This in and of itself is not entirely uncommon, particularly in New Orleans (although, it is getting better).

This time it was different. You see, this particular gentleman ran to the then District Attorney’s home following the alleged robbery. That’s where things went wrong.

According to the spokespeople from the DA’s and the Orleans Parish Sheriff’s offices, a prosecutor indicated at the top of the paperwork that the case had been “referred”, since the DA’s office recused itself from the case. Further down on the same form, under the heading “Charges Refused or Diverted”, the same prosecutor wrote “armed robbery”.

The DA’s office says the form is correctly filled out, for this situation.

The Sheriff’s office on the other hand, thought “recused” was “refused” and released him. The spokesperson said that the prosecutor didn’t tell them that the prisoner should not be released.

Essentially, because there was a perceived discrepancy on the form, the Sheriff felt a release was in order.

Let me offer a different take. The Sheriff’s office processes a large number of prisoners and forms on a regular basis. The clerks responsible look for certain things, which works fine for everyday, run-of-the-mill activity. That will not work when there are special circumstances.

Both sides are at fault, to varying degrees. Instead of finger-pointing, which is the knee-jerk reaction, look at what each side can do to fix it. Here are some ideas:

1. Review the procedures for processing forms
2. Review the forms themselves looking for needed revisions to the layout, requested/required information, etc.
3. When there is a special circumstance, such as this, give the Sheriff’s office a courtesy call so that everyone is aware of what it expected to happen
4. If there appears to be a discrepancy on a form, reach out to the prosecutor for clarification
5. When another mistake like this occurs, do not attempt to elude blame by saying, “We can only go by the paperwork they give us,” especially when the paperwork indicates your office screwed up

Imagine, instead of the media circus and inane comments blaming a piece of paper, the Sheriff’s office could have scored a public victory by taking the high ground, admitted an error occurred and offered possible solutions (most of which would be simple) to avoid the same mistake in the future.

Here is a link to the original story: Man who fled to home of DA released in error.

I’d like to hear you weigh in.

:: :: ::

The Inspiration

I was sitting in the back of the room during the AMA New Orleans annual President’s Forum. One of those presidents (for whom I have a great deal of respect) was lamenting the number of negative stories about New Orleans in the local and national press. His solution was to combat those with a series of positive stories. And he wanted us to get past the “Katrina fog” that still hangs over the city.

Well, there are a couple of problems. First, the reason there are negative stories is because there are still too many things going wrong. Simply saying things are better or good isn’t going to change that. Second, all of the national attention we still get related to Katrina is our own doing. Since the storm, we have made it a point to make sure that we are not forgotten, that we get the national support we need to complete the recovery. We can’t have it both ways, wanting the national support while avoiding the national spotlight.

I turned to a good friend of mine seated at the same table and asked, “Why aren’t we using all of our marketing talents to speak directly to the people in charge about how important it is to fix things?” For me, it was a bit of an “a-ha” moment. I know, I know, there are a number of organizations around that are doing just that. Those groups, however, are narrowly focused on specific issues.

Shortly thereafter, I had a second epiphany: this concept extends beyond the crime problem or the levees or political corruption. All of us can apply this idea on a much more personal level. Think about your home and work lives. What are some of the problems there? What are you doing now to fix them? Are you capable of fixing them? If you are capable and you’re not doing it, then you have a decision to make. You either need to take the steps to fix it, or get out of the way. You owe it to yourself and the people around you to do what is right.

I have some of my own ideas about what we can be doing to right some wrongs. But, admittedly, I don’t know everything and I don’t have all the answers. In other words, I am not advocating a soapbox or a forum for complaints. That is the problem we face now. It’s the same concept that IBM is advocating: “Stop talking and start doing.”

I am talking about a larger collaboration where people share their ideas for fixing what is wrong and look for crossover effects. We started the process by establishing a space on Wridea. Now, we need co-collaborators to help us generate and flesh out ideas related to home, work, crime, healthcare, corruption, you name it.

If you are interested being a part of this, please send me an e-mail at chris.mccrory@kennen-bmc.com, and I will send you an official invitation to join the space. If you would rather keep tabs on how its going and what ideas we are generating, then subscribe to this blog. I’ll keep it updated with the happenings.

Join the fray.

:: :: ::