Do Bosses Put The Brakes on Compassion, Kindness, etc?

[MysticSang'ha]

As I understand you, Heather, it's key that you are in a position to cherry pick potential employees and clients. I think that addresses my last question -- the one about what things can be done to ameliorate or eliminate the possible need to be cautious when exercising compassion, etc. Thanks for that! I think you're onto something there.

I know that not all businesses are in a position to do what you do. I guess ideally they would be, but most businesses in my experience, must take what they can get. Which in some ways is kind of sad, because, as you point out, it might often be better for everyone if they could pick and choose employees and clients who were an excellent fit for them.

That is sad. I offer something that hopefully doesn't sound snarky, though (bear with me). I hire workers who show that they can add onto what I do, not replace me. I once was criticized harshly by a local business owner who said that I was approaching my business as if I was just self-employed, and not looking to find a way to NOT be at my business, which was the mark of a "true" entrepreneur.

But then, she is also a business owner who has been struggling with staff turnover, numerous customer complaints, and low quality service. I think she is the one who is in error by trying to build a business based on being able to escape the responsibilities of the jobs there.

My hopefully un-snarky reply is that I think many business owners struggle when they would prefer to not take actual ownership and responsibility for their business. Whatever happens at the studio is under my watch, whether I'm there physically or not. I need to be aware of all departments, not to micromanage, but to simply be present and available. So, say for instance in my earlier example of releasing the student because of her mothers bullying toward a teacher, doesn't matter that I wasn't there, it's my job to take care of the situation and find a way to solve it, and to make a decision based on what is best for the business.

I don't have to step into every situation, but I do need to be present. The business I think requires me to be an example of what is expected. When I have put a bigger priority on meeting possible vendors during a time when it was better that I be present during a seminar, the impact is apparent. Sure, someone may say that the vendor is more important, but we're not at a stage right now to justify employing a CFO of sorts to handle these matters while I'm at the studio, or vice versa employing a studio director while I handle off-site matters. I need to make the decisions based on our budget limitations, time limitations, and revenue projections. In any case, I feel an obligation to be present for the business and the people who are a part of it.

I'm curious, though. You've mentioned just one incidence in which you had to tell a client you'd already taken on to leave. But if anything else comes up where there is a conflict between the needs of a client or employee and the needs of your business, please post it, if you don't mind.

The work never ends, does it!

No, it never does. I will post any other conflicts if they do come up.

Oh, I was once counseled by a successful dance studio owner who told me for him there are 6 important things that will determine the measure of success for my dance studio. The least 3 important things out of these 6 (though they are important, but are ancillary and supportive) are Accounting, Infrastructure, and Marketing.

However, he also mentioned the top 3 aspects of a dance studio business are:
- Operations
- Sales
- People

And he stressed that out of everything, the NUMBER ONE ASSET is the people. Invest in your people. Never invest in anything more than your people. Develop your staff. Be available on occasion for counsel or advice or just to be an ear. Never place marketing, the floor or sound system, your accounting, or even your sales above the people who contribute to the business. He also owned several other successful businesses, and said this was his secret to success, and he learned it many years ago from another successful business owner.

I have found this formula to be sound. So I've also been applying it to the dance studio. I only assume that it can be successfully applied to other businesses, and I've heard some feedback regarding the success of long standing businesses like Trader Joes and Costco as opposed to Walmart when it comes to how they invest in their employees.

I guess we'll see. So far so good.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

That makes sense. My question might have been a bit clumsy, though. I was trying to get at whether you thought that your boss (or you yourself, for that matter) needed to be more restrained at work than at home about showing compassion, kindness, generosity, etc. Would you address that, please?

I would say yes in general, people will take advantage if you are too familiar straight away.

 

[Sunstone]

And he stressed that out of everything, the NUMBER ONE ASSET is the people. Invest in your people. Never invest in anything more than your people. Develop your staff. Be available on occasion for counsel or advice or just to be an ear. Never place marketing, the floor or sound system, your accounting, or even your sales above the people who contribute to the business. He also owned several other successful businesses, and said this was his secret to success, and he learned it many years ago from another successful business owner.

As you might expect, I agree with you. I tried very hard to run my own business that way, and before that, to supervise the operations I ran for others that way. It's a cliche to say that "people are our greatest resource", but I believe it's solid truth.

I was mentored by a guy named, Bob, who basically just decided out of the blue that I was going to own and operate my own business and that he should teach me somethings about running it. Bob was kind of profound and would tell me things like, "Running a business is the best way to find out who you really are as a person". But what he emphasized most was the importance of your people. And he did that in ways great and small, ways direct and indirect, until he'd hammered into even a mind as slow on the uptake as mine that maybe I should spend a moment here and there thinking about PEOPLE.

 

[Sunstone]

I would say yes in general, people will take advantage if you are too familiar straight away.

Thanks! That's what I was hoping to get at. If you have any further thoughts on that, if you'd like to elaborate, please do so.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

I think some people see niceness as a weakness and they will try and suck you dry, I know, I have been taken advantage of. It is not good to view other people as yourself, only because you wouldn't stab someone in the back doesn't mean they won't do it to you, trust the signs, don't always try and see the good in people, some people really don't deserve it.

I don't think it is very good to be too friendly with you employees it often lead to you not firing them on the spot like you would do to someone you didn't know very well, I think there should be some boundaries definitely, for example if you are a manager don't get drunk/high with your employees and expect them to respect you the next day, there is certain things you shouldn't do when you are in a high position in the company with the people below you, even when you develop a "friendship."
I believe in being professional and having principles.

 

[Sunstone]

I think some people see niceness as a weakness and they will try and suck you dry, I know, I have been taken advantage of. It is not good to view other people as yourself, only because you wouldn't stab someone in the back doesn't mean they won't do it to you, trust the signs, don't always try and see the good in people, some people really don't deserve it.

I don't think it is very good to be too friendly with you employees it often lead to you not firing them on the spot like you would do to someone you didn't know very well, I think there should be some boundaries definitely, for example if you are a manager don't get drunk/high with your employees and expect them to respect you the next day, there is certain things you shouldn't do when you are in a high position in the company with the people below you, even when you develop a "friendship."
I believe in being professional and having principles.

Thanks! That's very helpful and addresses the OP spot on.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

As you might expect, I agree with you. I tried very hard to run my own business that way, and before that, to supervise the operations I ran for others that way. It's a cliche to say that "people are our greatest resource", but I believe it's solid truth.

I see it that way too.

I was mentored by a guy named, Bob, who basically just decided out of the blue that I was going to own and operate my own business and that he should teach me somethings about running it. Bob was kind of profound and would tell me things like, "Running a business is the best way to find out who you really are as a person".

OMG how true that is! It's rather like parenthood or marriage or anything that you have to make a profound commitment toward. When you commit to something much larger than yourself, where you are obligated to be present for and to take action for regardless of how things are going for you personally, I think you truly find your character.

Business, I think, differentiates itself in a way that requires a specific cash flow just for the continuation of operating. It's kind of like marriage requires intimacy. Parenting requires feeding kids and changing diapers. At these basic needs of each institution, it demands that those who are heading everything put aside personal hardship, trepidation, heartbreak, worry, and even excitement to get the job done.

Funny story...we were set to open within a few months time, and I looked at our available funds to see how we were going to pay for the start up costs of buildout. We were short a couple thousand dollars, due to some costs that were larger than I'd projected. Stress ensued. I kept telling myself that we were going to open regardless. I didn't know how, but we would open. And I stopped worrying and started looking for ways of either cutting overhead or increasing revenue.

Then something happened. We had a hailstorm and my car was left outside. I took my car in to the insurance center, they assessed my damages, and cut me a check for over $4,000 so I could repair the damage on my poor car. I asked if the damage was all cosmetic or if there was any structural damage. They said it was all cosmetic.

The decision was easy. That money went to the business. And I continued to drive my beat-up car afterward.

It was then I saw that the art of moving money around to the appropriate places became a skill and an awareness that I aimed to master. I also became mindful of opportunities that would pop up unexpectedly. Not in the sense of hailstorms specifically D), but that investors approaching, or instructors popping up out of the blue bringing students with them, or credit lines being approved at the last possible second, all going toward making things happen at the business requires an openness and a keen eye toward opportunity.

I have found that if an opportunity arrives, jump on it. Don't try to reason through it. Go ahead and analyze figures and the science behind it, but only to see if it's a good calculated risk. But don't let any opportunities pass. Take a chance! Then take another one!

How can I give that kind of advice to my instructors and my students about taking risks when I don't do it myself, even at my "advanced" age of 40? I want them to see that the journey doesn't stop, not after high school, not after college, and not after starting a family or owning a business.

But what he emphasized most was the importance of your people. And he did that in ways great and small, ways direct and indirect, until he'd hammered into even a mind as slow on the uptake as mine that maybe I should spend a moment here and there thinking about PEOPLE.

LOL that's cool. I remember you telling me about Bob some years ago. I'm inclined to agree with everything you said about his mentorship.

Okay, I have to ask....how would you feel about an offer someday to open a business based on your idea of erotic dance instruction? Someday. I don't know when. But if an opportunity comes up for you or me, I'd like to see us jump on it and get something going.

 

[Sunstone]

Okay, I have to ask....how would you feel about an offer someday to open a business based on your idea of erotic dance instruction? Someday. I don't know when. But if an opportunity comes up for you or me, I'd like to see us jump on it and get something going.

As you know, I am deeply committed to the notion that such a business could provide a wonderful public service. I can dream, and dream Big about it, but in the end there are still questions about how viable it would likely be. Would anyone want to pay money to learn how to dance? Would becoming superb dancers increase their earnings enough to justify the cost of lessons? And so forth.

We'd certainly need to do some careful research!

There are devious ways to insure we have clients, my dear! We could bribe local officials to pass an ordinance requiring people to be "board certified". Then we could get ourselves on the board and set standards that just happened to require our services if someone wanted to make the grade. I'm actually not opposed to such shenanigans, but the up front cost of them, the risk we couldn't set standards high enough, and so forth. You get my drift.

But the biggest question I have is about me. Yeah, me! If I got involved in something like this it would be life changing. I can't kid myself about that. I would need to change so many things about my life that I wonder whether, presented with the opportunity, I would be willing to do so -- even with my dreams tugging at my heart like horses.

The money would have to be good, but that's almost the least of it. Above all, I would need to feel the passion again. And that's something, Heather, that I just don't know would be forthcoming. Don't let me keep talking about it, though. I might work myself into a frenzy, get drunk, and end up in a strip club tonight trying to sell the staff on joining our academy!

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Well, I've come in late, and much of value has already been said, so I'll just do my usual trick and spout some nonsense, and see if you can find any pearls amongst it.

Quick background, I've never managed anyone in a formal sense. I've almost always been the team leader type, sports captain, whatever. Which is different to being a manager. And when offered management positions I've politely declined. I run my own business, but it's a two man operation, and we're equal partners. I'm good at teamwork. I cover people without holding it over them, I force them to take responsibility and just play safety net if it really goes to poo, I'm easy to work with, and I generally don't get stressed. I was referred to as the project canary in one project (as in, unless Dave is getting stressed, we're okay. If he gets stressed, run for the mine exit, she's about to blow).

So my advice/points/view is more from the perspective of a senior employee under a manager, rather than a manager, but I think it's worthwhile.

Looking back at my business career, I have INVARIABLY got myself into situations where my direct line report was someone who I respected (important), trusted (VERY IMPORTANT) and had a relationship with that went above and beyond the normal worker-boss relationship. I'm good at what I do, but I think my flexibility and adaptability are why I could ease myself across teams, or even companies when I wanted to. I'm also patient. Sometimes it takes some time for me to reposition myself, and to be honest it's only when looking back that I can see a very clear pattern of this in my behaviour.

So, I would submit myself as an example of what happens when you invest in people, trust in people, and let them in (a little). I'm the guy that was constantly getting an email from his boss saying 'Oy, timesheets...again!' or the guy still at the bar when his boss is heading off to bed (lotsa travel in our work). But I'm also the guy who ALWAYS turns up when it counts, and the one that gets tossed every steaming pile of turd the sales-guys have sold, and the consulting teams say is impossible.

Because of my lack of administrative discipline (shall we say) I trade to some degree on my relationships with my bosses. Sure, they could black mark me for a slow timesheet if they wanted. I'd nod, and agree it was my fault, and I'd make sure my timesheets were in on time from that point forward. Almost certainly within 6 months I'd slide (mostly internally) to somewhere that suited my personality better.

So, I guess what I'm saying is you need to be the sort of boss that your ideal employees would best work for. That doesn't mean you have to be nice to them all the time...all my favourite bosses could be very demanding from a work point of view. But they always treated me as a whole, not a robot. And they always judged the entire body of my work, not one aspect in isolation. Sure, the timesheet was missing. It's because I was working until midnight on the presentation for the next day. And I never mention that, because I don't want to be trying to get credit for working hard. And the flipside is I don't want to cop grief over a timesheet being late.

Anyways...there's some ramble for ya.
Oh, and Heather makes an AWESOME point. If you're hiring mini-you's, you're not building a team, you're building a dynasty of succession. Team requires complimentary skills. Absolute fundamental. I am great at building teams, always have been. Time will tell if the business keeps going as well as it does now and I have to build a company.

 

[Sunstone]

=lewisnotmiller;3454789]Well, I've come in late, and much of value has already been said...

I thought I'd give a quick response to this, before I read the rest of your post. Actually, Lewis, only one person has so far touched on answering the questions in the OP. Everyone else has chosen to ignore those questions and talk off topic. That's alright with me, because I've been enjoying this discussion immensely. But if you would care to actually address the questions in the OP, that would be fine too.

At anyrate, I'll get back to your post now.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I thought I'd give a quick response to this, before I read the rest of your post. Actually, Lewis, only one person has so far touched on answering the questions in the OP. Everyone else has chosen to ignore those questions and talk off topic. That's alright with me, because I've been enjoying this discussion immensely. But if you would care to actually address the questions in the OP, that would be fine too.

At anyrate, I'll get back to your post now.

Hmm...that's what I get for following the thread, and not the OP. Anyways, I'll have a crack at those questions when I can. Right now I have a sick daughter who wants cuddles. Your thread is kinda a poor second...

 

[Sunstone]

Right now I have a sick daughter...

Sorry to hear that! I hope she gets well soon.

 

[Sunstone]

To anyone who cares, I've changed the thread title in the hope the new title might elicit more on topic posts than the old title seems to have elicited.

 

[Sunstone]

So, I guess what I'm saying is you need to be the sort of boss that your ideal employees would best work for. That doesn't mean you have to be nice to them all the time...all my favourite bosses could be very demanding from a work point of view. But they always treated me as a whole, not a robot. And they always judged the entire body of my work, not one aspect in isolation.

Good points! Do you think that the typical boss is less likely to show compassion, kindness, etc, at work than he or she is at home?

 

[MysticSang'ha]

To anyone who cares, I've changed the thread title in the hope the new title might elicit more on topic posts than the old title seems to have elicited.

That was probably me that steered it all off-topic. Sorry about that.

Good points! Do you think that the typical boss is less likely to show compassion, kindness, etc, at work than he or she is at home?

Typically? I think bosses have a tendency to try to separate themselves with a "work" personality and a "home" personality. But I think most people have that tendency that to wear many hats means they must change their ethics of kindness and compassion to fit what they think is a particular mold.

I think bosses are like most people who falsely believe that a particular job description requires suspending compassion more so than others. It's as if to be "in charge" of people or of a situation, you must become less compassionate to get more respect, or to instill a good dose of fear to motivate the workforce.

I think parents go through the same assumption about how to be an effective parent to their children, that one must justify putting the brakes on compassion in order to solidify to their kids that they're not their "friends." You don't have to take away empathy and compassion to be an effective parent and leader, but all too often, people assume that if you don't do that, you're weak and permissive.

There's an assumption about bosses, too. That one must be quite the jerk in order to get people moving. Sad thing is, that humans can operate based on fear of rejection or termination, but the cost of putting that motivation into people who look up to you is greater than the short term gain made by using threats, intimidation tactics, being dismissive, and "acting bossy."

 

[Sunstone]

That was probably me that steered it all off-topic. Sorry about that.

As it happened, I thought the off-topic posts were pretty interesting. I just want to discuss the OP as well.

But I think most people have that tendency that to wear many hats means they must change their ethics of kindness and compassion to fit what they think is a particular mold.

Do you see any reasons why that tendency might not be best for people?

I think bosses are like most people who falsely believe that a particular job description requires suspending compassion more so than others. It's as if to be "in charge" of people or of a situation, you must become less compassionate to get more respect, or to instill a good dose of fear to motivate the workforce.

So, for instance, bosses do not increase their risk of being taken advantage of by being normally compassionate?

There's an assumption about bosses, too. That one must be quite the jerk in order to get people moving. Sad thing is, that humans can operate based on fear of rejection or termination, but the cost of putting that motivation into people who look up to you is greater than the short term gain made by using threats, intimidation tactics, being dismissive, and "acting bossy."

That's an especially good point, methinks. So, would you see the tendency, if it actually exists, of bosses to be less compassionate, kind, friendly, intimate, etc. at work than at home as something that is essentially caused by mistaken assumptions?

 

[Sunstone]

As you know, I am deeply committed to the notion that such a business could provide a wonderful public service. I can dream, and dream Big about it, but in the end there are still questions about how viable it would likely be. Would anyone want to pay money to learn how to dance? Would becoming superb dancers increase their earnings enough to justify the cost of lessons? And so forth.

We'd certainly need to do some careful research!

There are devious ways to insure we have clients, my dear! We could bribe local officials to pass an ordinance requiring people to be "board certified". Then we could get ourselves on the board and set standards that just happened to require our services if someone wanted to make the grade. I'm actually not opposed to such shenanigans, but the up front cost of them, the risk we couldn't set standards high enough, and so forth. You get my drift.

But the biggest question I have is about me. Yeah, me! If I got involved in something like this it would be life changing. I can't kid myself about that. I would need to change so many things about my life that I wonder whether, presented with the opportunity, I would be willing to do so -- even with my dreams tugging at my heart like horses.

The money would have to be good, but that's almost the least of it. Above all, I would need to feel the passion again. And that's something, Heather, that I just don't know would be forthcoming. Don't let me keep talking about it, though. I might work myself into a frenzy, get drunk, and end up in a strip club tonight trying to sell the staff on joining our academy!

Don't us dare let anything I said there dissuade us from exploring the idea's feasibility if and when the time comes. It has the potential, at least, to really change things for the better!

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Do you see any reasons why that tendency might not be best for people?

Yes, and I think it's because it creates fuzzy areas of ethics that might not have existed were that person to simply maintain a steady course of compassion and clarity. An example is if a boss were to say to himself or herself not to "get too close" to employees, and to stay aloof, distant, and made it a point to appear uninterested in employees families and personal lives.

But say one week the boss notices a dramatic drop in production from an employee, and so that employee is called in to discuss how to fix the situation. They discover that the employee's spouse is dying of cancer, that it's an aggressive cancer, and that the employee is all at once trying to prepare for the spouse's passing, grieving, and trying to maintain some semblence of normality.

That boss is in a precarious position. How does a boss respond with limited compassion that will result in higher productivity? How does a boss maintain his or her standard of ethics when suddenly personal lives and work are mixed together?

I think it's why some bosses turn into complete royal *******s when faced with this situation. They do actually maintain a limited compassion and resort to numbers, stats, and reminders of consequences for not meeting quotas.

All because of a fear that showing kindness and compassion will lead to people taking advantage of it. It's one of the most unfortunate assumptions about humanity that I've ever come across, and it leads to all kinds of bitterness and mistrust. The workplace is no different. It's what you surmised from my previous post....

So, for instance, bosses do not increase their risk of being taken advantage of by being normally compassionate?

Yes. Parents do it. Teachers do it. Leaders do it. Heck, deities even do it. It's that noise in the back of our heads saying that we really can't trust anybody because all they'll do in the end is stab us in the backs, they'll burn us bad, they'll take the money and run, give them an inch and they'll take a mile... Bosses I think will limit their compassion with the same mindset. The sad thing is that it's untrue. Across the board. The reality is that people who screw other people over will do it with others who are mean AND who are nice to them. Sociopaths will do it for any reason. People with chips on their shoulders will screw over people who felt screwed over by an authority figure or a perceived equal.

That's an especially good point, methinks. So, would you see the tendency, if it actually exists, of bosses to be less compassionate, kind, friendly, intimate, etc. at work than at home as something that is essentially caused by mistaken assumptions?

Yes. I do see it that way.

 

[idav]

What do you think?

Bosses aren't supposed to be friends really but at the same time employees are more productive in environments where they are shown appreciation and employee morale is high on the list. High morale can be achieved without necessarily befriending them while letting them know that their hard work is appreciated. Give the employees the tools they need to succeed and hold them to those expectations.

 

[Sunstone]

Bosses aren't supposed to be friends really but at the same time employees are more productive in environments where they are shown appreciation and employee morale is high on the list. High morale can be achieved without necessarily befriending them while letting them know that their hard work is appreciated. Give the employees the tools they need to succeed and hold them to those expectations.

So, you recognize that bosses tend to be less friendly to employees than to non-employees (if I'm reading you right), but see that as what they are "supposed" to do. But what would happen if they didn't? Would they become ineffective?