Certification, Training and Licencing

Bill Trussell has an interesting post in his blog on "licencing administrators".

I agree that there may be a need in certain industries to truly license systems administrators or other technical personnel who deal with certain types of systems.

Even more important is the impact that certifications (licensing) has on our staff and staff members. Certifications allow us to qualify individual in the hiring process and provides a vehicle (training) for improving staff competency, providing avenues for individual advancement and/or bringing certain functions in house.

Generation X - Harvard Business

Ok, I admit it - I like "10's lists". I also like articles that delve into the impact of culture on the work place. Tammy Erickson's article "10 Reasons Gen X'ers Are Unhappy at Work" in Harvard Business added to my understanding of generational differences and the impact of those differences on the work place.

As a "boomer" and son of a life long GE employee I came into my career with no other expectation than a job in corporate America. Since then I've moved around but remained attached to the idea of corporate job or close ties (consulting) to Corporate America. The article made me think through what many of my younger colleagues have experienced. It also made me think about perceptions - specifically what my own children think about the careers that lie ahead of them in light of what they have seen of my career and the careers of their friends parents. Note: I am the father of a high school freshman and a 6th grader.

Below are Ms. Erickson's 10 Reasons - but please read the full article because each reason has much more to it than the headings supplied below.

1. X’ers corporate careers got off to a slow start;

2. When you were teens, X’ers witnessed adults in your lives being laid off from large corporations;

3. Most corporate career paths “narrow” at the top;

4. Just your luck – the economy was slow when you entered the workforce;

5. And then there are those pesky Gen Y’s;

6. X’ers are, in fact, surrounded by a love fest – and not feeling the love;

7. X’ers are the most conservative cohort in today’s workforce;

8. Many X’ers’ are guarding a closely held secret;

9. Boomer colleagues are annoying;

10. Finally, your own parenting pressures are at a peak.

There are two items that resonated - #2 and #4. Many Gen X'ers would have been entering the workforce during the "corporate re engineering" efforts of the 1980's and the downsizing / economic downdraft of the late 1990's and early 2000's. They watched as parents, relatives and friends were laid off. I did not experience anything like that in my teenage years or during the middle years of my career. But the economy was very slow in the late 1970's when I entered the workforce and I did experience, first hand, tech bust in 2002 while on the verge of moving into the VP / C-level ranks. So I can relate.

My own children have watched as I have moved between jobs and while I have never really struggled financially, because I was able to move into consulting, those changes must have had an impact (note to self: discuss careers with children)..

Leaderhip Styles

I was recently asked about my leadership style. My immediate response was that I am "collaborative" (participative). As I have considered that response I realize that while I am generally collaborative my style does naturally shift with the situation.


I can, at times, be autocratic. That happens in situations where something has to get done in a very specific way on a short time frame. I can be free rein (delegative) in situations where "the group" knows what they have to do and doesn't require intervention.


I then started looking for articles on leadership style and found (as you might expect) quite a few opinions on the subject. Here are several.


Wikipedia has included 12 leadership styles in the entry on the subject. Many of these strike me as being subsets of the more basic leadership styles that I've encountered. But the overview provided in the article is good description of styles and situations.


The diagram above apparently originated in a the 1973 US Army Handbook - I found it in on the nwlink site (http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/leader/leadstl.html). In his article Mr. Clark notes that good leaders use all three styles. I've included the list below - Note: I encourage you to read the entire article because there is substantially more information, it is quite well thought out and well written.

From Mr. Clark's article "A good leader uses all three styles, depending on what forces are involved between the followers, the leader, and the situation. Some examples include:

• Using an authoritarian style on a new employee who is just learning the job. The leader is competent and a good coach. The employee is motivated to learn a new skill. The situation is a new environment for the employee.


• Using a participative style with a team of workers who know their job. The leader knows the problem, but does not have all the information. The employees know their jobs and want to become part of the team.


• Using a delegative style with a worker who knows more about the job than you. You cannot do everything! The employee needs to take ownership of her job. Also, the situation might call for you to be at other places, doing other things.


• Using all three: Telling your employees that a procedure is not working correctly and a new one must be established (authoritarian). Asking for their ideas and input on creating a new procedure (participative). Delegating tasks in order to implement the new procedure (delegative). "
  

CIO Magazine has several interesting articles on style. "The Best Leadership Style" comes at the question from the point of view of the company's perspective on I.T. Specifically, is I.T. "Strategic" or a "Factory". The perspective was interesting - noting that it's much harder to lead I.T. in a company where the function is viewed as a factory, cost center, etc. The leader in this type of organization must continuously prove the value of I.T. An I.T. leader in a "factory" will require a different style than one where I.T. is viewed strategically.

Earlier in the article author discussed styles required when I.T. is functioning well vs when it is not. In cases where I.T. is functioning well - soft skills, a more participative/collaborative approach and a more strategic view may work well. When I.T. is not functioning well - those approaches won't work.

My take - we all have a leadership style and a strength - we must recognize that style. Since we must use several styles depending on the organization and the situation we have to develop other styles and approaches to meet those situations. As leaders that is the key - recognizing strengths and weakness in ourselves, our staffs and our organizations.

Habits

An interesting problem with habits - I got in the habit of posting regularly. While in that habit I found that it was easy to find interesting subjects on which to comment. I found the process intellectually stimulating, I got interesting emails (with more ideas), and the reading pointed me in directions on leadership and technology that I had not previously explored.

Then I got started on a consulting project and despite the fact that I had time - I didn't post. I have good material but could not seem to find the time to work through my thoughts.

So I'm going to get back in the habit. Stay tuned.