How checking things off your “to do” list is different than solving problems

December 7, 2012

I am in the middle of a small war with the management company of our condo complex. As the board president, I constantly liaise with our property manager about problems that need to be solved on the property. A recent issue is an excellent example of the difference between management and leadership.

There are 110 town homes in our condo complex that are approaching 40 years old. Structural wear and tear is starting to be a problem. This year, one unit had a major ant infestation. We got an exterminator to deal with the problem immediately. He said that the ants were entering through small holes under the kitchen window and in addition to his extermination services, he recommended that we fix the exterior by plugging up the holes that the ants use as entry points to the house.

Since the beginning of August I have been sending in requests to get the holes around the exterior of the windows fixed. I am not an expert in windows or building envelopes or exterior structures, but it was pretty clear where the holes were. I sent in a request to have the caulking around the outside of the window

The property manager has a construction company that they send out on a regular basis to do jobs on the property. I have met them and they are actually great guys. They know what they are doing. They arrive on time, they do a good job, they clean up after themselves, and they are pleasant to all the residents who live here. It doesn’t really get much better than that.

But this ant issue has recently turned into an all out war.

Last month I said, “I have been asking for this to be done for 3 months. Please have the work done.”

His reply, “I have talked to the contractor. He says the work has been done.”

Yesterday I looked at the unit. The entry points for the ants are still visible.

I wrote again, saying “Four months have now passed since I sent in this work request. This work has not yet been completed. Please have the work done.”

The reply came back, “The contractor assures me that he has caulked around the window. Can I give the contractor your phone number and you can deal with him directly?”

I went outside and looked. Indeed, the area around the metal frame had been caulked, but the entry points for the ants were still wide open. I took some pictures. I highlighted the areas where ants were entering:

Ant photos.001

Here is the second photo:

Ant photos.002

I sent the photos together with this letter:

Dear John:

I’ve been thinking about this. If you say to a guy, “Go caulk around the window.” He’s going to come over and caulk around the window. The job is done because the job was “to caulk around the window”.

 If you say to the guy, “This place has an ant problem. The kitchen wall is covered with thousands of ants. The exterminator says they are coming in from outside, specifically from around the kitchen window. Go over there and have a look at the outside of the kitchen window. Figure out every possible entry point for the ants to get in around that window. Plug each and every last one of those holes up, so the little buggers can’t get in.”

The job is done when the window is turned into an ant version of Fort Knox. No one — not one little ant — gets in.

That is an entirely different job than, “Go caulk around this window.”

The job we need to have done is the second one — plug up every possible entry point for ants from around that kitchen window.

If you need to give the contractor my number to explain that, then go ahead, but I’m pretty sure you get the idea about what we are after here, which is a solution to the problem of blocking how the ants get into the unit.

Every time you send a guy — or a couple of guys — to our property to do a job, they are not just checking off items from a “to do” list. They are solving problems for the people who live here. In doing that, they are making their life better.

I’m not trying to be melodramatic here, but every time one of your guys comes to our property to fix a problem for a resident, they get a chance to be somebody’s hero. They do that by solving a problem that the owner can not solve by themselves, because they either do not know how or they do not have the skills, expertise, materials, or maybe just the time. That’s one reason people live in condos.

I guarantee you that the single lady who lives in that unit does not have the skills or materials to fix this problem herself — or she would have already.

Your guys have all that — skills, talent, expertise and materials. We rely on you to hire smart guys and you do that. We see it time and time again. They’re smart, they’re capable and they can solve problems. In a small way, they can be somebody’s hero.

So tell your guy that this is his chance to be a hero for Marilyn, the lady who lives there.

Thanks,

Sarah

When it comes to leadership, it is important to give people all the information they need to solve a problem. If you hire smart people, then do not simply give them items to check off their “to do” list. Engage people’s skills, expertise and problem-solving abilities to make them part of the solution. In doing so, you are likely to make their work more meaningful… and both they — and their work — will have a greater impact on those they are helping.

I believe deeply in people’s capacity to solve problems, help others and do meaningful work.

Checking items off a “to do” list does very little to connect the work to the people who may benefit from it. Besides, work that only involves checking items off a “to do” list often lacks meaning, especially when that list is assigned to you by someone else.

Engaging smart people to develop sustainable solutions helps everyone over the long term.

_________________

Share or Tweet this: How checking things off your “to do” list is different than solving problems http://wp.me/pNAh3-1×6

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.


Cold-Handed Collaboration: Why it Worked

January 17, 2011

When I talk about “cold-handed collaboration”, I mean it literally, not metaphorically. I live in a condominium townhouse in Calgary, Alberta. I’ve been on the board of directors for our condo association for three years now. I love working with other owners who live in our community on projects to improve the complex.

In Calgary there is a municipal recycling program, which means that the City will collect recycling from homes, just as it picks up garbage. The problem is that right now, that program does not extend to condominiums. We pay for private garbage pick-up in our complex, just as all condominiums in the city do.

Last year, we decided to bring recycling to our condo complex. We started with a pilot project. Four of the board members (including me) tested out the services of Harvest Recycling for a couple of months. At our regular board meetings we reported back with feedback. We were pleased with the results and decided to extend the program to the entire complex.

We arranged with Harvest Recycling to deliver bins to our complex, which would be paid for by the condominium corporation. Our plan was to deliver one bin to each house hold. Since the bins were paid for out of the “common pot” so to speak, one board member had the idea of writing the unit number of each house on the bins. We agreed this was a good idea.

We sent letters to every unit, with details of the new program and how to participate.

We arranged with the company to purchase and drop off the bins for us. We agreed to make time in our schedules to deliver the bins to each unit, writing the house number on each bin as we went along. One board member bought markers to tag the bins.

The bins arrived on Saturday. For those of you who don’t live in Calgary, we’ve been having a bit of a cold snap lately. On Saturday, the temperature was -23 C (that’s -9 Farenheit). Once you factored in the wind chill, it felt like -30C (that’s -22 Farenheit).

Jan 15 2011 weather

The truck arrived with the big blue bins. Not only did they need to be delivered, they needed to be assembled. The lids came separately from the bins. We had to snap a lid on to each bin, deliver it to a unit and tag the bin with the unit number.

Five board members and one other volunteer all bundled up and went outside into the frigid temperatures to tackle the project. As I reflect on this, I can see some reasons why it worked so well:

We made a commitment

We had previously agreed to work together on the day the bins were delivered. We had no idea that it would be so cold on Saturday, but we had all said we would be there.

We kept our word

Despite the cold, no one reneged on their commitment. I don’t think any of us particularly wanted to be doing our volunteer work outside that day, but we did it anyway. We had an agreement and we kept it.

We had a purpose

We were committed not only to our date and time, but also to our recycling project. We had been talking about it for months at our board meetings, working on our pilot project for several weeks and we knew that we wanted this.

We worked together

When you’re outside in -30 Celcius windchill, there isn’t much point in standing around. You stay much warmer if you keep moving. We hustled. We collaborated. We figured out what had to be done and we did it.

We grumbled, but not about each other

Really, how could you not complain about the cold? We commiserated about the weather and fantasized about summer coming. There’s a difference between being a complainer and commiserating. The complainer stands out by being grouchy when no one else is. Commiserating, on the other hand, actually means “to be miserable together”. We bonded through a shared (and thankfully, temporary) experience. We were in it together, by choice – and that didn’t change the fact that it was freezing outside.

We socialized

All work and no play makes for miserable working conditions. We took the opportunity to chat as we worked, catching up with one another. It made the time pass faster and gave us a chance to bond on a personal level, too. We laughed. We smiled. We joked about our eyelashes freezing. We had a good time. A few of the neighbors who saw us working said hello and we chatted about the recyling program that will start next week.

We took breaks

There was no one cracking a whip out there in the cold. As directors of the board, we all have leadership positions and we’re all adults. When one person said, “I’m going to go inside and put on some long underwear”, we saw the good sense in that. Someone else chimed in and said, “Why don’t we all go inside for a few minutes and warm up?” Heads in hoods, toques and other hats nodded in agreement. Within a few minutes, three of us sat in my kitchen drinking warm chai lattes and hot chocolate. We reconvened after our break, during which many of us had donned additional clothing.

We acknowledged a job well done

At the end of it all, we acknowledged the efforts of the others by saying things like “Good job, guys!” or “Nice work, team!” The acknowledgment was brief and sincere. That’s all it needed to be. Then we all returned to our respective homes to warm up and carry on with our day.

To do the job alone would have been utter misery. To collaborate and have six of us working together was effective and efficient. By the end of it all, we had cold-hands, but warm hearts, as they say.

_________________________________________

Share this post: Cold-Handed Collaboration: Why it Worked https://wp.me/pNAh3-rP

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.