Have you met a competent jerk?
A colleague, Dr. Kenneth Nowack, describes the competent jerk as someone who is difficult to work with or lacks interpersonal skills, but is highly knowledgeable and capable. Sometimes they are “unwavering in their convictions (mostly having to do with them being right) that they are unwilling to take counsel and see absolutely no reason to change their ways” (Envisia Learning White Paper, 2006, “Coaching Competent Jerks: Can Zebras Change Their Stripes?).
Now this is tricky because many executives have been so rewarded for being a jerk throughout their career, being a jerk has exquisite value. The jerk’s position is, why change? They see no benefit to be gained from transforming from being a jerk to becoming a decent human being. In fact they have much to lose.
The competent jerk’s reluctance to change is understandable. This always reminds me of the story of a very nice man, Bob Newhart, the former accountant who mined his nervous stammer and deadpan demeanor for comedy gold. As a stand-up comedian, Newhart’s underplayed delivery and gentle stammering earned him three Grammys and the first comedy album to reach #1 on the Billboard charts. His unique brand of humor translated well to television, where he starred in two of the best-loved sitcoms of the 1970s and 1980s.
When he was doing The Bob Newhart Show, one of the producers pulled him aside and said that the shows were running a little long. The producer wondered if Newhart could cut down the time of his speeches by reducing his stammering. "No," Newhart told him. "That stammer bought me a house in Beverly Hills."
For many executives, being a jerk got them where they are today. Actually being a jerk can work under certain circumstances or life cycles of an organization. For instance, this can work well when a company needs someone to take charge in a turnaround situation or crisis mode, but doesn’t work so well when you are in growth mode.
The poster child for the competent jerk boss is Al Dunlap, author of Mean Business: How I Save Bad Companies and Make Good Companies Great (Dunlap with Bob Andelman, 1997). His tough, tell-it-like-it-is persona stems from humble beginnings in Hoboken, New Jersey. ``My parents couldn't afford to send me to college,'' he says, ``so either I got a scholarship or I wouldn't get an education.'' A West Point graduate, he believed in screaming at and purposefully humiliating his employees like, including top management. Dunlap was so ruthless in downsizing corporations for short-term shareholder profit that he earned nicknames such as "Chainsaw Al" and "Rambo in Pinstripes."
Wall Street loved Dunlap at Scott Paper, where he laid off thousands, but then hated him at Sunbeam, where he himself was finally fired. Another book, Chainsaw, by John A. Byrne (2003), dramatically documents the rise and fall of Dunlap, the havoc he wreaked on companies and people's lives, and how he came to power in the first place. Dunlap, unhappy about Byrne's reporting, once said of the Business Week writer, "If he were on fire, I wouldn't piss on him." It's a charming quote that Byrne uses to kick off his last chapter.
In my experience, even the competent jerk can change. For me this conjures up images of someone I coached named Stuart, a boss that yelled and screamed, purposely to make people feel intellectually inferior. Stuart was leading the company during a turnaround crisis and he wanted the company to act with urgency. He saw himself like an emergency room physician attending a bleeding trauma patient. In that world there is no time to be nice.
Stuart’s management style worked, in the short run. But when things turned around at the company, that behavior didn’t work any more. If Stuart wanted to continue to lead he needed to learn skills like persuasion and inspiration. When finally confronted with the honest truth (“you either get an executive coach or an outplacement specialist to help you find a new job”), Stuart found the inspiration to change his ways.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
The Prodigal Executive Myth That You Can't Teach An Old Executive New Tricks
The proverb “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks” explains why people who have long been used to doing things in a particular way will not abandon their habits. This expression is often used in the workplace to describe how difficult it is for someone who has been doing something one way for a long time to learn how to do it a new way.
Here is some food for thought from my book, The Prodigal Executive. There is some scientific backing to this concept about an older person’s inability or lack of desire to learn about new and modern things.
A protein normally associated with the immune system could hold a clue to one of the great puzzles of neuroscience: why you can't teach old dogs new tricks. The Harvard medical School study, published in the journal Science, could even create hope for people suffering spinal cord injuries and brain damage.
Plasticity in the brain is its ability to rewire internal connections as a result of experience. Normally this plasticity is largely restricted to critical periods of development early in life, meaning puppies are more receptive to learning tricks.
Now Harvard researchers have shown that adult mice who lack a certain protein have brains that retain the plasticity of much younger mice. Put another way, mice that have protein are less able to make new connections (Science, Aug. 25 2006, “Learning Induces Long-Term Potentiation in the Hippocampus”).
Historically executive incompetence has been conceptualized in terms of a manager not having the characteristics of success (Bray and Howard, Longitudinal Studies of Adult Psychological Development, 1983). These included the tricks of being able to delegate, to maintain relationships with peers and direct reports, and to build a team.
However, I believe the notion that executives are set in their ways and unable to learn is just not true. My experience is working with top executives, helping the best of the best to get even better through some season of derailment. I have found that the best want to learn more so they can be the best that they can be.
So how do you teach these old dogs new tricks? You have to do it in small amounts so they get success along the way. You also need to help them see how these new skills will help them reach some higher goal they desire.
This reminds me of story of virtuoso violinist. An interviewer asked him, what is your number one regret? He replied, “I should have become the violinist I knew I could have become.”
The interviewer said in disbelief, “But you are the maestro of maestros, the best of the best.”
What the world-renowned violinist wanted was to be even better. Likewise executives. All top executives are success driven. They are constantly trying to get better at their craft and become all that they can be.
Take Peter, for example. Peter, president of a Fortune 500 subsidiary company, was the most creative genius I have ever met. His level of intuition and ability to analyze problems were superb. He was also one of the best negotiators I have ever seen. Peter picked up subtle nuances and would instantaneously have the perfect retort ready.
With all of those skills it was amazing why the corporate vice president of human resources invited me in to coach Peter.
Peter never listened to anybody who worked for him. He felt because he was the smartest person in room (no doubt true), listening just wasted time because he already knew what was best. Not surprisingly, there was a mass exodus of top talent from the company.
I coached Peter to listen using small steps. First, I just had him practice not talking for awhile while his subordinates spoke. Next we had him practice nodding while others spoke. Then, while going through the motions, something amazing happened. He actually heard what they were saying. “I sure learned a lot more listening than when I was talking.” For Peter, listening was a whole new trick and he continued doing it.
Here is some food for thought from my book, The Prodigal Executive. There is some scientific backing to this concept about an older person’s inability or lack of desire to learn about new and modern things.
A protein normally associated with the immune system could hold a clue to one of the great puzzles of neuroscience: why you can't teach old dogs new tricks. The Harvard medical School study, published in the journal Science, could even create hope for people suffering spinal cord injuries and brain damage.
Plasticity in the brain is its ability to rewire internal connections as a result of experience. Normally this plasticity is largely restricted to critical periods of development early in life, meaning puppies are more receptive to learning tricks.
Now Harvard researchers have shown that adult mice who lack a certain protein have brains that retain the plasticity of much younger mice. Put another way, mice that have protein are less able to make new connections (Science, Aug. 25 2006, “Learning Induces Long-Term Potentiation in the Hippocampus”).
Historically executive incompetence has been conceptualized in terms of a manager not having the characteristics of success (Bray and Howard, Longitudinal Studies of Adult Psychological Development, 1983). These included the tricks of being able to delegate, to maintain relationships with peers and direct reports, and to build a team.
However, I believe the notion that executives are set in their ways and unable to learn is just not true. My experience is working with top executives, helping the best of the best to get even better through some season of derailment. I have found that the best want to learn more so they can be the best that they can be.
So how do you teach these old dogs new tricks? You have to do it in small amounts so they get success along the way. You also need to help them see how these new skills will help them reach some higher goal they desire.
This reminds me of story of virtuoso violinist. An interviewer asked him, what is your number one regret? He replied, “I should have become the violinist I knew I could have become.”
The interviewer said in disbelief, “But you are the maestro of maestros, the best of the best.”
What the world-renowned violinist wanted was to be even better. Likewise executives. All top executives are success driven. They are constantly trying to get better at their craft and become all that they can be.
Take Peter, for example. Peter, president of a Fortune 500 subsidiary company, was the most creative genius I have ever met. His level of intuition and ability to analyze problems were superb. He was also one of the best negotiators I have ever seen. Peter picked up subtle nuances and would instantaneously have the perfect retort ready.
With all of those skills it was amazing why the corporate vice president of human resources invited me in to coach Peter.
Peter never listened to anybody who worked for him. He felt because he was the smartest person in room (no doubt true), listening just wasted time because he already knew what was best. Not surprisingly, there was a mass exodus of top talent from the company.
I coached Peter to listen using small steps. First, I just had him practice not talking for awhile while his subordinates spoke. Next we had him practice nodding while others spoke. Then, while going through the motions, something amazing happened. He actually heard what they were saying. “I sure learned a lot more listening than when I was talking.” For Peter, listening was a whole new trick and he continued doing it.
Friday, April 3, 2009
The Prodigal Executive Myth That A Leopard Can't Change Its Spots
There is an old adage that says “A leopard can’t change its spots,” which means we cannot change our innate nature. The saying has been around for thousands of years and is derived from the biblical Book of Jeremiah: “Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots?”
While there is much truth in that adage, it is not true 100 percent of the time in the workplace. I’ve found again and again that toxic executives can change their personality, even if they have been that way for a long time. Personality is malleable if there is a reward for doing so. Prodigal executives can manage the personality they are given if there is a good reason.
Meet Beverly, an executive with a large financial institution. She was exquisitely ambitious, highly focused, task driven, willing go the extra mile to make sure everything done and done correctly. Beverly truly was a star performer in anyone’s business model. However, she was seen as unapproachable and devoid of any emotion by the people around her.
What got her off track was not unusual. When we over use our strengths they become a weakness. Beverly was so task oriented she forgot to take care of people around her. This caused conflicts with her direct reports and a noticeable drop in their productivity. She wasn’t making a personal connection with her business connections.
When it comes to improving and maintaining our relationships with others, Stephen Covey’s metaphor of the Emotional Bank Account is probably one of the most helpful ideas ever created for the developing personal relationships at work (Covey, Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, 1989).
Covey says anyone with whom we have a relationship with, whether it be our coworkers, family or friends, we maintain a personal “emotional” bank account with them. This account begins with a zero balance. And just as with any bank account, you need to make deposits before you can make withdrawals. Deposits are things like sincere compliments and personal interest in the other person’s goals. When you ask direct reports to work late or do extra work, that is a withdrawal. If you haven’t made the deposits beforehand then you have nothing to withdraw and the account becomes overdrawn. As a general rule, the formula is you need to make five deposits for every withdrawal. Because Beverly was not doing this, her direct reports greatly resented her.
Sometimes all that is needed to change is new information. With coaching Beverly was able to show more interest in people. She now views the people equation as another part of her job, a necessary component to get the job done.
While there is much truth in that adage, it is not true 100 percent of the time in the workplace. I’ve found again and again that toxic executives can change their personality, even if they have been that way for a long time. Personality is malleable if there is a reward for doing so. Prodigal executives can manage the personality they are given if there is a good reason.
Meet Beverly, an executive with a large financial institution. She was exquisitely ambitious, highly focused, task driven, willing go the extra mile to make sure everything done and done correctly. Beverly truly was a star performer in anyone’s business model. However, she was seen as unapproachable and devoid of any emotion by the people around her.
What got her off track was not unusual. When we over use our strengths they become a weakness. Beverly was so task oriented she forgot to take care of people around her. This caused conflicts with her direct reports and a noticeable drop in their productivity. She wasn’t making a personal connection with her business connections.
When it comes to improving and maintaining our relationships with others, Stephen Covey’s metaphor of the Emotional Bank Account is probably one of the most helpful ideas ever created for the developing personal relationships at work (Covey, Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, 1989).
Covey says anyone with whom we have a relationship with, whether it be our coworkers, family or friends, we maintain a personal “emotional” bank account with them. This account begins with a zero balance. And just as with any bank account, you need to make deposits before you can make withdrawals. Deposits are things like sincere compliments and personal interest in the other person’s goals. When you ask direct reports to work late or do extra work, that is a withdrawal. If you haven’t made the deposits beforehand then you have nothing to withdraw and the account becomes overdrawn. As a general rule, the formula is you need to make five deposits for every withdrawal. Because Beverly was not doing this, her direct reports greatly resented her.
Sometimes all that is needed to change is new information. With coaching Beverly was able to show more interest in people. She now views the people equation as another part of her job, a necessary component to get the job done.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Does the Derailed Executive Want to Change?
There's an old joke: How many psychologists does it take to change a lightbulb?
The answer is just one, but the lightbulb has to want to be changed.
Before you can help a derailed executive you have to determine if they want to change.
The other evidence the person doing the coaching should look for is if the derailed executive makes the initial coaching session very short and really isn't willing to open up and take risks. If this happens, that person is usually a poor candidate for coaching, and I let the company know. That way I don’t waste my time or the company's money.
A couple things happen in those first coaching sessions with a derailed executive who is coachable. In most cases the derailed executive tells me they want to be changed. They say things like, "I don’t want to be seen as a bully. I don’t want to be seen as a negative. I don’t want people to think I am a prima donna."
There are three types of responses derailed executives have:
1. The first is the type that acknowledges there is a discrepancy between the view other people have of them and what they have of themselves. These derailed executives put it out there that they do want to be become the best leader or executive they can be. They just don't know how to change, what to say or what to do.
2. While that's the majority, there are is a minority percentage who are skeptical because they're scared. These executives have worked with other people before and they want to know how working with an executive coach will make any difference.
3. A small fraction of derailed executive are a combination. Sometimes I don’t know what I'm going to say until I've tried a few things and see what hits the mark with this group.
A question I sometimes as during a structured interview is, "At your retirement dinner, what do you want people to say about you? At your funeral, what do you hope the mourners would say?”
The answer is just one, but the lightbulb has to want to be changed.
Before you can help a derailed executive you have to determine if they want to change.
The other evidence the person doing the coaching should look for is if the derailed executive makes the initial coaching session very short and really isn't willing to open up and take risks. If this happens, that person is usually a poor candidate for coaching, and I let the company know. That way I don’t waste my time or the company's money.
A couple things happen in those first coaching sessions with a derailed executive who is coachable. In most cases the derailed executive tells me they want to be changed. They say things like, "I don’t want to be seen as a bully. I don’t want to be seen as a negative. I don’t want people to think I am a prima donna."
There are three types of responses derailed executives have:
1. The first is the type that acknowledges there is a discrepancy between the view other people have of them and what they have of themselves. These derailed executives put it out there that they do want to be become the best leader or executive they can be. They just don't know how to change, what to say or what to do.
2. While that's the majority, there are is a minority percentage who are skeptical because they're scared. These executives have worked with other people before and they want to know how working with an executive coach will make any difference.
3. A small fraction of derailed executive are a combination. Sometimes I don’t know what I'm going to say until I've tried a few things and see what hits the mark with this group.
A question I sometimes as during a structured interview is, "At your retirement dinner, what do you want people to say about you? At your funeral, what do you hope the mourners would say?”
Friday, March 6, 2009
Helping Prodigal Executives Get Back on Track With Feedback
In my book about derailed executives, The Prodigal Executive, I use Mark’s story to illustrate the point. His goal was to be a leader of his company. This is the goal he wanted to reach, but he kept getting off course. Like his own personal career GPS, I assisted him to find his way.
Mark (real story, not his real name) was a very bright, articulate, engaging and ambitious senior leader. He was educated at one of the finest universities in engineering. He thought like an engineer and had a long impressive resume with major international manufacturing companies. When I met Mark, I was called in to provide coaching to upgrade his skills so he could be part of the leadership of the company.
After a 360 degree feedback survey, the message back from his direct reports was that he did not show enough strength as a leader. He was not decisive enough to make tough decisions. Therefore, he allowed too many people issues to slide by. The result was resentment. Since he was trained as an engineer, he had not taken the time to develop his emotional intelligence.
Now Mark could have given up and just accepted a technical role in the organization.
During our coaching, I suggested to him that being stronger was part of being an effective leader. Showing strength was going to be critical. Since he truly wanted to be a leader, he took risks. As we worked together I kept giving him signals if he was on course or of course. There was one situation where he actually stopped an interview because he felt it was a waste of time for everyone. He stopped the interview with professionalism, but the message to his team was that he was strong enough. His leadership capital increased exponentially.
Mark (real story, not his real name) was a very bright, articulate, engaging and ambitious senior leader. He was educated at one of the finest universities in engineering. He thought like an engineer and had a long impressive resume with major international manufacturing companies. When I met Mark, I was called in to provide coaching to upgrade his skills so he could be part of the leadership of the company.
After a 360 degree feedback survey, the message back from his direct reports was that he did not show enough strength as a leader. He was not decisive enough to make tough decisions. Therefore, he allowed too many people issues to slide by. The result was resentment. Since he was trained as an engineer, he had not taken the time to develop his emotional intelligence.
Now Mark could have given up and just accepted a technical role in the organization.
During our coaching, I suggested to him that being stronger was part of being an effective leader. Showing strength was going to be critical. Since he truly wanted to be a leader, he took risks. As we worked together I kept giving him signals if he was on course or of course. There was one situation where he actually stopped an interview because he felt it was a waste of time for everyone. He stopped the interview with professionalism, but the message to his team was that he was strong enough. His leadership capital increased exponentially.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Where Do You Find Prodigal Executives
Where do you find prodigal executives? These are the managerial train wrecks that are too painful to keep and too valuable to fire. Many people also know them as derailed executives.
You find them everywhere. Some of my clients have included the CEO of a high tech manufacturing firm, a CEO of a $10 million bio- technology company, the Chief Technology Officer of a $27 billion international technology company, senior executives at a bio-medical research company, and executives from a Fortune 500 bio-medical pharmaceutical company. I also have experience working with organizations that are being blended because of a merger or acquisition. Once I was involved with the integration of the San Francisco Examiner into the San Francisco Chronicle. I have facilitated retreats on strategic planning for The Los Angeles Times, St. Luke Hospital, Century City Hospital, Midway Medical Center, Giga-tronics, and Northrop-Grumann. I have also facilitated offsite retreats for Disney Consumer Products Organizational Development Department and an architectural firm start-up.
Derailed executives are everywhere. The good news is 8 out of 10 can get back on track with the right coaching. Prodigal executives can make it back home.
You find them everywhere. Some of my clients have included the CEO of a high tech manufacturing firm, a CEO of a $10 million bio- technology company, the Chief Technology Officer of a $27 billion international technology company, senior executives at a bio-medical research company, and executives from a Fortune 500 bio-medical pharmaceutical company. I also have experience working with organizations that are being blended because of a merger or acquisition. Once I was involved with the integration of the San Francisco Examiner into the San Francisco Chronicle. I have facilitated retreats on strategic planning for The Los Angeles Times, St. Luke Hospital, Century City Hospital, Midway Medical Center, Giga-tronics, and Northrop-Grumann. I have also facilitated offsite retreats for Disney Consumer Products Organizational Development Department and an architectural firm start-up.
Derailed executives are everywhere. The good news is 8 out of 10 can get back on track with the right coaching. Prodigal executives can make it back home.
Monday, February 16, 2009
When to Fire The Prodigal Executive
You can’t save everybody. Nor should you. Many derailed executives are just daring you to fire them.
One day a CEO said to me, "I just can't get Byron to step it up."
Byron (real story, not his real name) was a director of engineering for a technology company. He was a long term employee. The company, which started off as an entrepreneurial family-based business that grew very fast, handled high amounts of high tech manufacturing.
Now the production lines were getting stuck, the company wasn’t getting product out the door fast enough, and they were having too many returns. Because Byron had been with the organization from day one, the CEO did not want to fire him.
“When you start off with a family-based business like ours,” said the CEO, “there's a strong sense of loyalty.”
A consultant was brought in to help with the engineering and I was brought in to see if I could help Byron improve his leadership skills. The first couple sessions went well and then all of a sudden Byron started changing his appointments. Following that he began to show total disinterest. So I told the CEO that I wasn't sure he was going to be engaged n the process. He might have a different agenda and it is getting in the way. Two weeks later the CEO called me to tell me that he was firing Byron.
What I told the CEO surprised him. “In a few months Byron will call you up and tell you that he's happier where he's at, and everyone will be able to move on. The CEO did hire a new director of engineering that was extremely sharp. Sure enough, Byron found a better job that was more in line with his skills. In truth, this worked out better for everyone.
The moral of the story is that sometimes it's better for everyone to move on.
The focus of my book, The Prodigal Executive, is on the 80% that are able to get back on track after being derailed. However there are 20% of derailed executives who, for a variety of reasons, fail to get enough traction to strike the balance between "too painful to keep" and "too valuable to get rid of.”
Invariably, one of two scenarios transpire.
The first scenario goes something like this. During the assessment process the derailed executive realizes that part of the derailment was an unconscious wish to disengage from the company in the first place. So there's a voluntary departure where the individual says "Because I couldn’t pull the trigger myself and was unhappy, I was alienating other and decided it was time to leave."
This scenario plays out in many situations. Most decide not to go through the coaching process. As coach, if I define it early on I say to the executive, "You don’t need me, you need a replacement consultant or you need a conversation with the CEO in order to work out a smooth transition that's in everybody's best interest. But to make yourself miserable and everybody else miserable really doesn’t make much sense."
The second scenario is rare. This occurs with individuals who, for whatever reason, are recalcitrant to changing their behavior. Many of them are in complete denial and feel the problems are all about everybody else. These executives really are uncoachable. For me it is important to find this out as early as possible, because, as the coach, I'm not there to do outplacement to help people leave, I'm there to help them stay. Often times the company decides this person is causing too much pain, and the risk and investment in the coaching is too high. In this case, everybody would be better off if this person disengaged from the company.
I've only had two of these rare recalcitrant situations. In both instances I think the executive was still in the wrong job. The executive was truly unhappy and didn't see any value for making any substantive changes so they could get back on track. In one case the person rejected the coaching outright. He didn't want to do what it took to increase his ability. So the CEO called and said, "Time for him to leave" and I agreed.
One day a CEO said to me, "I just can't get Byron to step it up."
Byron (real story, not his real name) was a director of engineering for a technology company. He was a long term employee. The company, which started off as an entrepreneurial family-based business that grew very fast, handled high amounts of high tech manufacturing.
Now the production lines were getting stuck, the company wasn’t getting product out the door fast enough, and they were having too many returns. Because Byron had been with the organization from day one, the CEO did not want to fire him.
“When you start off with a family-based business like ours,” said the CEO, “there's a strong sense of loyalty.”
A consultant was brought in to help with the engineering and I was brought in to see if I could help Byron improve his leadership skills. The first couple sessions went well and then all of a sudden Byron started changing his appointments. Following that he began to show total disinterest. So I told the CEO that I wasn't sure he was going to be engaged n the process. He might have a different agenda and it is getting in the way. Two weeks later the CEO called me to tell me that he was firing Byron.
What I told the CEO surprised him. “In a few months Byron will call you up and tell you that he's happier where he's at, and everyone will be able to move on. The CEO did hire a new director of engineering that was extremely sharp. Sure enough, Byron found a better job that was more in line with his skills. In truth, this worked out better for everyone.
The moral of the story is that sometimes it's better for everyone to move on.
The focus of my book, The Prodigal Executive, is on the 80% that are able to get back on track after being derailed. However there are 20% of derailed executives who, for a variety of reasons, fail to get enough traction to strike the balance between "too painful to keep" and "too valuable to get rid of.”
Invariably, one of two scenarios transpire.
The first scenario goes something like this. During the assessment process the derailed executive realizes that part of the derailment was an unconscious wish to disengage from the company in the first place. So there's a voluntary departure where the individual says "Because I couldn’t pull the trigger myself and was unhappy, I was alienating other and decided it was time to leave."
This scenario plays out in many situations. Most decide not to go through the coaching process. As coach, if I define it early on I say to the executive, "You don’t need me, you need a replacement consultant or you need a conversation with the CEO in order to work out a smooth transition that's in everybody's best interest. But to make yourself miserable and everybody else miserable really doesn’t make much sense."
The second scenario is rare. This occurs with individuals who, for whatever reason, are recalcitrant to changing their behavior. Many of them are in complete denial and feel the problems are all about everybody else. These executives really are uncoachable. For me it is important to find this out as early as possible, because, as the coach, I'm not there to do outplacement to help people leave, I'm there to help them stay. Often times the company decides this person is causing too much pain, and the risk and investment in the coaching is too high. In this case, everybody would be better off if this person disengaged from the company.
I've only had two of these rare recalcitrant situations. In both instances I think the executive was still in the wrong job. The executive was truly unhappy and didn't see any value for making any substantive changes so they could get back on track. In one case the person rejected the coaching outright. He didn't want to do what it took to increase his ability. So the CEO called and said, "Time for him to leave" and I agreed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
