My undergraduate degree is in mathematical economics. In my work as an educator and coach, I always believe in measuring positive change in human interaction. I love John and Jim’s idea of increasing the application of measurement in the human dimension. Here are some edited excerpts from a recent e-mail interview with them.

What is Human Sigma, and why do companies need it?

The Human Sigma approach combines a proven method for assessing the health of the employee-customer encounter with a disciplined process for improving it. It is based on five new rules to bring excellence to the way employees engage and interact with customers. Companies that follow these principles are outpacing their competition by 26% in gross margin and 85% in sales growth.

How much of your thinking on Human Sigma is owed to Six Sigma?

Well, our answer to that is some. There are some really good conceptual ideas that Six Sigma brought in terms of how to focus an organization on improving itself. But remember that Six Sigma was developed in a manufacturing context, and the role of people was relatively small, 10% or so. Our argument is essentially that business leaders have not focused on people, and our rationale is they haven’t done so because it’s hard. People are the hardest thing to fix. So Human Sigma was developed as a response to the lack of effectiveness of Six Sigma methodology for increasing productivity from people.

It seems it would be difficult to measure human interactions in a scientific way. Can you tell us how that is done?

The act of measuring itself is quite simple: Ask the people involved in an interaction how it made them feel. This simple activity is based on a large body of scientific research about what to ask them, how to ask them, and why asking them works. The right questions are crucial. That is the expertise we have accumulated over a long period of time researching and consulting on the issues and from reviewing data from the millions of employees and customers we have interviewed.

If it is clear from the research that employees hold the key to raising profits and value in a company, why is it that management has been traditionally inept at measuring and managing them?

We have only learned how to measure this accurately in the past 10 to 15 years, so part of the problem has been a simple lack of reliable metrics. This inability to measure engagement also prevented the accumulation of the data needed to build a solid understanding of how to engage employees.

Now that we have a considerable amount of data, it has also become clear that many of the assumptions companies have made about their employees have simply been wrong. For example, there has been a tendency on the part of many executives to value control over quality by scripting employee behaviors when they interact with customers. These executives view employees as mistakes just waiting to happen, as impediments to doing business, and as costs to be minimized. It is difficult to engage an employee who knows that he is viewed as a costly nuisance at best by the organization’s leadership.

Why are people so hard to deal with?

There are a couple of good reasons. If you buy a tractor or a furnace, you know what you’re going to pay for it, how it’ll depreciate, where it goes in the system, what the maintenance costs are likely to be, and roughly when it will quit. If it melts steel or pulls a load at a given rate today, it’ll do the same or very close to that tomorrow.

People, of course, meet none of those conditions. They’re unpredictable, both in ways that you might appreciate and ways that you don’t appreciate. So because people— employees and customers—are much more unpredictable than machines, they can’t be managed or directed in prescribed ways. That makes for a lot of work.

Once you have learned to measure this employee-customer encounter, how can a company work to improve it?

Sustainable improvement in the employee-customer encounter requires disciplined local action coupled with a company-wide commitment to changing how employees are recruited, positioned in roles, rewarded, recognized, and, most important, how they are managed.

In your book, you said the employee/customer encounter is the new factory floor. How did you mean that?

If you contrast manufacturing environments with service economy environments, you need a new definition of value creation for a service economy. The definition that we landed on was that value is created when an employee and a customer come together and they interact. And that’s different from manufacturing, where you create value by making a product that is ready to be sold. Creating value in a manufacturing context is fairly straightforward. If you have a lot of broken products, you have problems. If you have no broken products, no poor-quality products, then your business can flourish. In a service business, so much more is focused on the interaction that your employees have with your customers that you need a new set of tools to evaluate how well you’re doing in that space.

Does Human Sigma apply to noncustomer-facing employees?

Certainly. Think of the guy on the loading dock who may not ever talk to the customer, but if he drops your TV before he loads it on the truck, or if he takes an extra three days to get it to the store, all those things have implications for customers whether that employee ever talks to them.

Can our readers reach you?

Yes, you can contact us at authors_humansigma@gallup.com

Marshall Goldsmith (Marshall@MarshallGoldsmith.com) is corporate America’s preeminent executive coach and a founder of Marshall Goldsmith Partners. He is the author, most recently, of Mojo: How to Get It, How to Keep It, How to Get it Back if You Lost It, as well as What Got You Here Won’t Get You There – the Wall Street Journal #1 best seller, and Succession: Are You Ready – published in February 2008 as part of the Harvard Business ‘Memo to the CEO’ series. Marshall is also on the faculty of the executive education programs at Dartmouth College and the University of Michigan.

This article in a different form originally appeared in Talent Management Magazine.

This project—interviewing people over 60 about the secrets of life—sounds like great fun. I wish that I had done it! What gave you this idea?

When I travel to a new city, I read reviews from people who have been there before—of hotels, restaurants, and things to do. Since I have always been interested in why some people find lasting fulfillment, it seemed to me that same method could apply to life and career. If you want to know the secrets to a happy life, you should ask someone who has lived one.

So I asked several thousand people to identify the one person they knew who had “lived a long life and found lasting happiness.” After reviewing over 1,000 suggestions, we conducted in-depth interviews with an extremely diverse group of 250 people ages 60 to 106. We asked them to reflect on their lives and careers to tell us what they had learned: the things that brought meaning and fulfillment as well as the regrets and things they wished they had learned sooner.

Why did you choose to interview people over the age of 60?

I feel we live in a society that tends to dismiss experience in favor of youth. This is out of step with what human societies have done for thousands of years. When I was done with the interviews, I had tapped into 18,000 years of life experience! It doesn’t get any better than that!

Was there one secret that really stood out for you?

The importance of following your heart and being true to yourself. Many of these people told me about critical times in their lives when they had to follow their own dreams instead of the dreams of other people, what parents, friends, or society was telling them to do.

The first thing is the choice of our careers, which must begin with understanding ourselves and what we love to do. I have met so many people over my years in business who are in jobs or careers that are not a good fit for their deepest self. Maybe they followed what their parents wanted them to do or they just got stuck in a career and keep trying to make it fit who they are.

What about beyond one’s career?

I learned each one of us has a path we are meant to follow. Some of us were meant to spend our lives outdoors or working for ourselves or helping others or living a life of adventure. These people all had different dreams, but the common element is that they followed the voice inside themselves.

A man named Ron, for example, had a family that wanted him to become a medical doctor but he had an experience right before going to study medicine when he realized it was not his path. Others told him the path he was choosing was crazy, but he listened to his own voice and that decision made all the difference in how his life turned out. When I asked him how you know when you are following your heart he told me: “I think most of us know, but we have to have the discipline to listen and the courage to follow.” What I learned is that most people reading this know if they are following their heart right now but we have to have the courage to follow that voice.

What role did taking risks play in finding happiness?

One of the questions we asked people was about key moments when they reached a crossroads and when the paths they chose made a big difference in how their lives turned out. In almost every case, the important crossroads involved risk, stepping out of your comfort zone in some way. Looking back, people often identified those moments of “stepping out” as being the key to their ultimate happiness and success. When I asked people if they had risked enough almost every one of them said “nowhere near enough.” What I concluded is that many of us play it way too safe and it is often when we feel uncomfortable that we know we are making the right decision.

The other fascinating thing is that almost no one regretted a risk they took that didn’t work out—whether in work or their personal life. We can handle the risks we take that don’t work out but what we can’t deal with is the feeling that we didn’t try for what we really wanted. These people told me that the thing we should fear most at the end of life is that our last words would be: “I wish I had…” So the moral to the story is that if there is a dream or hope you have for your life, make sure you at least try for it.

When people looked back on their careers and lives, what gave them the most meaning and sense of purpose?

One of the questions we asked people was what brought them the greatest happiness and the greatest meaning and also what turned out not to matter very much. The most common sources of meaning were relationships and feeling they had made something better while they were here. When people looked back on their careers and lives, happiness came from feeling that they gave something to others, whether it was the people they mentored, the impact they had on some matter that was important to them, or the relationships people had developed during their lives.

It occurred to me that we think what will make us happy is what we get (money, status, power, praise) but what ends up giving us the greatest happiness is what we gave while we were here.

When I asked people what did not matter very much the three most common answers were: money beyond what you need to be comfortable, what other people think of you, and having status. Many of these people said they wished they had learned sooner that life is not a contest and your happiness is not about how you compare with others because there will always be someone who has more of whatever it is you think you want.

Many of these people are well beyond the traditional retirement age. Did you learn anything about staying “young at heart”?

These people ranged from 60 to 106, but they were not “out to pasture” and were still living vital lives both in work and life. Many of them told me how important it is not to pull the curtain down too soon on your life. One of my favorite people was a 93-year-old man named John who had three careers, including that of a painter, a career he began in his sixties. Like so many of the people I interviewed, these people assumed they could contribute until very late in life.

Thank you! How can our readers reach you?

My e-mail address is JohnIzzo@aol.com. My Web site is www.theizzogroup.com.

Marshall Goldsmith (Marshall@MarshallGoldsmith.com) is corporate America’s preeminent executive coach and a founder of Marshall Goldsmith Partners. He is the author, most recently, of Mojo: How to Get It, How to Keep It, How to Get it Back if You Lost It, as well as What Got You Here Won’t Get You There – the Wall Street Journal #1 best seller, and Succession: Are You Ready – published in February 2008 as part of the Harvard Business ‘Memo to the CEO’ series. Marshall is also on the faculty of the executive education programs at Dartmouth College and the University of Michigan.

This article in a different form originally appeared in Business Week.

Sometimes these words or phrases morph as people try to keep up with the latest trends in corporatespeak. A company may begin by striving for “customer satisfaction,” then advance to “total customer satisfaction,” and then finally reach the pinnacle of “customer delight.”

Enron Talked a Good Game

But this obsession with words belies one very large problem: There is almost no correlation between the words on the wall and the behavior of leaders. Every company says it wants “integrity,” “respect for people,” “quality,” “customer satisfaction,” “innovation,” and “return for shareholders.” Sometimes companies get creative and toss in something about “community” or “suppliers.” But since the big messages are all basically the same, the words quickly lose meaning for employees.

Enron is a great example. Before the energy conglomerate’s collapse in 2001, I had the opportunity to review Enron’s values during a meeting with its senior management team. I was shown a wonderful video on Enron’s ethics and integrity. I was greatly impressed by the high-minded beliefs the company espoused and the care that was put into the video. Examples of Enron’s good deeds in the community and the professed character of Enron’s executives were particularly noteworthy.

It was one of the most smoothly professional presentations on ethics and values that I have ever seen. Clearly, Enron spent a fortune “packaging” these wonderful messages. It didn’t really matter. Despite the lofty words, a number of Enron’s top executives either have been indicted or are in jail.

J&J Adheres to its Credo

The situation couldn’t be more different at Johnson & Johnson (JNJ), where I had the opportunity to work with that company’s top 2,000 leaders. The pharmaceutical company is famous for its “Credo,” which was written many years ago and reflects the sincere values of the leaders of the company at that time. The J&J Credo could be considered rather quaint by today’s standards. It contains several old-fashioned phrases, such as “must be good citizens—support good works and charities —and bear our fair share of taxes” and “maintain in good order the property that we are privileged to use.” Like most values statements, it conveyed a great message, but it had none of the slick PR packaging that Enron’s did.

Yet, even with its less-powerful language and seemingly dated presentation, the J&J Credo works—primarily because over many years, the company’s management has taken its values seriously. J&J executives have consistently challenged themselves and employees not just to understand the values, but to exhibit them in their day-to-day behavior. Whenever I conducted leadership training for J&J, one of its most senior executives would spend many hours with every class. The executive’s task was not to talk about compensation or other perks of J&J management; it was to discuss living the company’s values.

My partner, Howard Morgan, and I completed a study of more than 11,000 managers in eight major corporations. We looked at the impact of leadership development programs in changing executive behavior. As it turns out, each of the eight companies had different values and different words to describe ideal leadership behavior.

But these differences in words made absolutely no difference in determining the way leaders behaved. One company spent thousands of hours composing just the right words to express its view of how leaders should act—in vain. I am sure that the first draft would have been just as useful. In our study we found that leaders who took training and feedback seriously, made a personal commitment to improvement, and followed up with their co-workers became more effective. Leaders who just listened to the talk but took no action or made no commitment improved no more than those who hadn’t even heard the talk.

Actions Speak Loudest

Companies that do the best job of living up to their values and developing ethical employees, including managers, recognize that the real cause of success—or failure—is always the people, not the words. Rather than wasting time on reinventing words about desired leadership behavior, companies should ensure that leaders get (and act upon) feedback from employees—the people who actually observe this behavior. Rather than wasting time on changing performance appraisal forms, leaders need to learn from employees to ensure that they are providing the right coaching.

Ultimately, our actions will say much more to employees about our values and our leadership skills than our words ever can. If our actions are wise, no one will care if the words on the wall are not perfect. If our actions are foolish, the wonderful words posted on the wall will only make us look more ridiculous.

(This column has been modified from a piece that originally appeared in Strategy+Business, Summer, 2005.)

Marshall Goldsmith (Marshall@MarshallGoldsmith.com) is corporate America’s preeminent executive coach and a founder of Marshall Goldsmith Partners. He is the author, most recently, of Mojo: How to Get It, How to Keep It, How to Get it Back if You Lost It, as well as What Got You Here Won’t Get You There – the Wall Street Journal #1 best seller, and Succession: Are You Ready – published in February 2008 as part of the Harvard Business ‘Memo to the CEO’ series. Marshall is also on the faculty of the executive education programs at Dartmouth College and the University of Michigan.

This article in a different form originally appeared in Talent Management Magazine.

Members of different referent groups tend to define ethics or morality from the perspective of their group. We all tend to judge others as being right or wrong from the perspective of our referent group. It is critical that global leaders learn to understand others’ perspectives without coming across as judgmental.

Defining Referent Groups

The size of our referent group may range from “the world” to “me,” and almost anything in between. For example, some people see themselves as citizens of the world. They may even be willing to sacrifice what is good for most living humans in order to do what they think is right for the long-term survival of the planet. On the other extreme, some people are focused on “me” and are willing to sacrifice what is good for the world to benefit themselves. In most organizational life, either extreme can often produce a problem.

Some major referent groups include: gender, philosophy, country, geographic area, ethnic group, race, sexual orientation, corporation, work team, extended family, and nuclear family. For each of us, varying parts of our identity are connected with multiple groups. This may vary with age. For example, “family” is a major referent group for children ages 6 to 12, while “peer group” becomes a more important referent group between the ages of 12 and 15. Younger people tend to have less identification with the organization as a referent group, while older, more tenured employees tend to have more corporate identification.

Changing With the Times

Historical events can change our referent groups. In the U.S., World War II caused many young people to strongly identify with America. The Vietnam War caused many young people to have less identification with America. Before World War II, identification with race was much more common. After World War II, primary identification with race has become much more unacceptable. Leaders need to be sensitive to these changes and know how they can have an impact on the perceptions of employees.

There may be major differences between the referent groups with whom we pretend to identify and those with whom we really identify. For example, in the 1950s American corporate world (of Sinclair Lewis) it was “politically correct” to pretend that the corporation was more important than ourselves or even our family. While the essence of capitalism is self-interest, it has often been considered inappropriate to overtly demonstrate self-interest when working for a major capitalist corporation.

Today, many workers with great potential define themselves as “free agents.” While managers in a different referent group may perceive them as selfish, free agents can still be great team players in an organization that recognizes their perspective and builds win-win relationships.

Action Speaks Louder

One of the best ways to understand the power of referent groups is to focus on behavior more than words. By observing behavior and then asking ourselves, “Which referent group is the person really serving?” we can begin to understand the deeper rationale for behavior that may have previously appeared illogical.

Many of the differences that exist among people are easily understood when we know their different referent groups. If you believe that the encroachment of the Western world will lead to the demise of your “pure” culture, and your primary referent group is this culture, it is perfectly acceptable (or even noble) to do almost anything to stop this encroachment.

In a corporate setting, if you believe that your family is your most important referent group, it can be perfectly logical to go home early and not worship the corporate God. It can be noble to turn down promotions (even though this may show a lack of ambition to others).

Sound Philosophy

In discussing referent groups, I am not implying that “cultural relativism” is an inherently good philosophy. In fact, cultural relativists can be just another form of a referent group. They can define themselves as “intellectually superior” to people who have a well-defined set of core values. Many organizations have clearly defined values that relate to key referent groups. It is important for leaders to understand that multiple referent groups (that may not be on the values statement) can also be a key part of an employee’s identity. This is especially true outside the Western world.

My suggestion is that we can all increase our own interpersonal effectiveness by better understanding the powerful concept of referent groups. We can better understand that perfectly logical people have very different views on the world. We don’t have to agree with them (or even respect them), to be able to see their point of view. By understanding our own referent groups and the referent groups of others we can often agree to disagree without wasting our time on trying to convert each other.

Even more important, people in our organizations can more easily disagree with each other without having to judge each other. The Center for Creative Leadership’s research on successful cross-cultural leaders has shown that “understanding without judging” is a key predictor of successful leadership. A deep understanding of how referent groups impact behavior can help leaders achieve this goal.

Marshall Goldsmith (Marshall@MarshallGoldsmith.com) is corporate America’s preeminent executive coach and a founder of Marshall Goldsmith Partners. He is the author, most recently, of Mojo: How to Get It, How to Keep It, How to Get it Back if You Lost It, as well as What Got You Here Won’t Get You There – the Wall Street Journal #1 best seller, and Succession: Are You Ready – published in February 2008 as part of the Harvard Business ‘Memo to the CEO’ series. Marshall is also on the faculty of the executive education programs at Dartmouth College and the University of Michigan.

This article in a different form originally appeared in Business Week.

In One Foot Out the Door, you claim that as many as two-thirds of U.S. employees are victims of a “psychological recession.” What is this condition and why has it become so widespread?

A psychological recession means people are feeling economically and psychologically vulnerable and unprotected now and with regard to the future. Once established, this negative mindset reinforces people’s view that the world is a risky place in which they have little or no control. And the media’s focus on bad news makes it worse. There’s widespread fear in the population, and it is more powerful than what the facts indicate.

This assault on our traditional optimism is closely tied to the loss of job, health, and pension security, to Iraq and Afghanistan, soaring energy prices, and other specific situations or conditions. But the basic source of this bleak view is the feeling that, despite hard work and education, no one has control over what happens to them and no one in business or government gives a damn.

Why do people’s feelings about the economy matter more than the facts?

There are hundreds of studies that find a clear and powerful relationship between energized, enthusiastic, involved employees and positive financial outcomes. When people feel they’re treated well, that they’re respected and trusted and much is expected of them, they voluntarily work better and harder. The reverse is also true. Very simply, which organization will do better: the one in which employees say, “There’s nothing in this for me,” or the one where you hear, “This is a great place to work”?

When people feel devalued, there is very high turnover as people look elsewhere for more positive situations, productivity is characteristically low, and there is no innovation. When people are perceived as a cost and not a resource, they don’t do their best and they don’t stay.

How do bad management practices perpetuate the psychological recession and exacerbate its toll on a company?

Bad managers frequently feel free to vent negative messages while withholding any recognition, which reinforces employees’ sense they are insignificant. Bad managers don’t relate effectively to subordinates, they are not trusted, they don’t communicate, they are neither liked nor respected.

Most managers don’t connect with and engage their subordinates. The Gallup Organization collected a database of 4.5 million employees in 12 industries from 2002 to 2005 and found 20% of employees are engaged, 60% are not engaged, and 20% are actively disengaged. This means that in the majority of organizations about 60% of employees work only enough to keep their jobs and another 20% would hurt the organization if they could. No organization can succeed for long when 80% of their employees are not engaged.

What can managers do about this problem of the psychological recession and the behavior of bad managers? What specific strategies work to change employees’ attitudes and improve their productivity?

Some poor managers are trainable, and with coaching or mentoring can change to more effective behavior. If bad managers do not perceive their shortcomings, it may be necessary to reassign them to other professional jobs that don’t involve supervising others.

In general, employees want to feel they are assets; that their organization needs, respects, and rewards them for their contribution. When managers enable employees to have these positive feelings, a psychological recession will be replaced by positive feelings and a sense of optimism.

You advocate “customization” of working conditions and rewards as the best way to motivate employees. Is tailoring incentives to each individual’s priorities a realistic goal for managers of dozens, if not hundreds, of different employees?

Customizing is much easier than it first appears. The actual number of things that people really want at any one time always falls into a small number of clusters.

Around 1986 to 1995, for example, people wanted challenge, success, autonomy, and money. From 1995 to 2001 during the dot-com boom and the soaring stock market, people wanted money and autonomy. Now there are three new priorities: to have both my work and my family flourish, to like and respect my colleagues and bosses, and to have meaning in both my life and my work.

How can U.S. business leaders sustain competitive advantage on a global scale?

Many people are afraid of the competition from countries in Asia, but most don’t realize that the most critical variable for success now and in the future is innovation. Some countries that may compete with us do not encourage different views; they may see them as a challenge to their power. As a result, people in these societies become good at memorizing and doing what is already accepted. But they can’t create significant innovations because challenging authority is unthinkable, so they are not skilled in seeing and thinking differently. Innovation also requires widespread trust that you won’t be punished because you have a different view.

Americans need to remember that in our very brief history we have been extraordinarily successful because we initiate and innovate, and that is the result of core American values. We believe in freedom of thought, respect for individuals, and a flat playing field. We believe you are what you achieve and everyone is owed the opportunity to try. We believe that failure is not permanent and those who fail should get up and try again. It will never be easy to graft these values onto cultures whose histories and values are very different.

Judy, thanks for your thoughts. I have written in this column about some of my positive experiences working in Asia (BusinessWeek.com, 5/30/07). After my positive remarks about working in India (BusinessWeek.com, 8/28/07), I had many e-mails from our Indian readers saying that their culture does not encourage challenge as much as it should. It is great to hear your positive game plan for U.S. companies. How can our readers contact you?

I can be reached at jmbwick@san.rr.com.

Marshall Goldsmith (Marshall@MarshallGoldsmith.com) is corporate America’s preeminent executive coach and a founder of Marshall Goldsmith Partners. He is the author, most recently, of Mojo: How to Get It, How to Keep It, How to Get it Back if You Lost It, as well as What Got You Here Won’t Get You There – the Wall Street Journal #1 best seller, and Succession: Are You Ready – published in February 2008 as part of the Harvard Business ‘Memo to the CEO’ series. Marshall is also on the faculty of the executive education programs at Dartmouth College and the University of Michigan.

This article in a different form originally appeared in Business Week.

Have you found that even extremely successful people may have sometimes taken the wrong road?

Wrong turns happen all the time. We never really know what the job will be like until we are in it. Sometimes we find that the job description doesn’t match the actual duties and that even more responsibilities have been added to our plates. Or perhaps the manager who was so kind during the interviews turns out to have a mean streak.

Even people who love a field in school can find themselves disappointed by the daily reality of that kind of work. That’s what happened to me. I got my undergraduate degree in accounting and enjoyed my courses. Thinking it was the right career, I focused on getting my CPA and landing a great job at a top firm. Unfortunately, the lifestyle of an accountant required more travel and longer hours than I bargained for. I felt I had made a serious wrong turn. Yet from there, I have been able to change course to become the career consultant and radio host I am today.

Quite a turn. What’s a key sign that you’ve made a wrong turn career-wise?

Lack of interest. If you aren’t contributing your best, and are just going through the motions getting the minimum done, it may be that you’ve made a wrong turn. A client I worked with recently found that she just didn’t feel like giving work her all. Her manager was starting to notice as well. As we worked together, we realized her career in finance didn’t play to her interests in reading people and situations. She had valuable insights but they weren’t appreciated or rewarded in her current role. I coached her to approach her manager about creating a client-relationship role whereby her interests and talents would better serve the needs of the firm.

Are most managers sympathetic to changing their employees’ jobs if they’re not happy?

Some managers are and some aren’t. But whatever kind of manager a person has, they have to be prepared to pitch the new role or job change. First, tell your manager you have an idea that you’d like his feedback on. Next, explain your idea for a new role and how this change will benefit both your manager and the company. It is much more difficult for a manager to say “no” if the change is beneficial to all parties. Finally, ask your manager to pilot the idea for 90 days. Piloting is a great way to test out the new role and show results. It also takes the pressure off your manager because there is a built-in deadline for scrapping it if the idea doesn’t work.

What other signs may point to a wrong turn?

Lack of energy. I’ve had clients [who have made wrong turns] tell me they feel they have to put in 10 times more energy than their co-workers just to get the job done. They also say their family and friends comment on how tired they seem all the time. If you feel work is a drain on you, chances are you’ve made a wrong turn, especially if you dread going to work every day. Many people accept that work is a meant to be a chore and don’t even recognize their lack of energy as a sign of a wrong turn. The right career fuels you—and gives you energy.

Perhaps, but most people can’t just walk away from their jobs. How do you suggest people get back on the right path?

Step one is to forgive yourself. Don’t waste time beating yourself up for having made a bad career decision. You’re not a failure. The job just wasn’t a good fit.

Next, don’t blame others. The last thing you’ll want to do is point fingers at your manager or your colleagues for your bad job experience. Bad-mouthing others will only damage your relationships, and in today’s connected world you never know who knows who.

Create an exit strategy. If you need the paycheck from the “wrong turn” job, you can still take steps to move onto the right path. These steps are not usually immediate, but rather more of a process. For instance, work with a coach or mentor to determine the right next step for your skills and experience and get back into job search mode. Next, take time to make a list and document a timeline and don’t be afraid to let your network know you’re back on the market. They’ll want to know why you’re making a change, so be prepared with a valid response that doesn’t make you look like a job-hopper.

Any suggestions on how a person can ensure a good fit and avoid repeating a wrong turn?

Ask the right questions in the job interview. I coached a client out of a stifling job and into a better fit by helping her formulate questions for her next potential boss. She wanted a manager who was a mentor and not a micromanager, so she asked the manager to share the ways he’s grown and developed previous employees. Luckily, he didn’t give her a blank stare, but rather real examples of successful employees he has developed in the company.

And remember, no turn is completely a wrong turn. You have learned and developed in every job you’ve had. Put a positive spin on your career path and find ways to link your past experiences with your dream job. I was not cut out to be a CPA, but since then I’ve realized that all my career choices have been helpful to me. For example, my CPA degree gives me greater credibility as a coach when working with business people and helps me understand the demands of a corporate career.

Can our readers contact you?

Definitely. I can be reached at maggie@maggiemistal.com or at Making a Living with Maggie on the radio on SIRIUS (SIRI) Satellite 112 every Thursday at 7 p.m. EST.

Marshall Goldsmith (Marshall@MarshallGoldsmith.com) is corporate America’s preeminent executive coach and a founder of Marshall Goldsmith Partners. He is the author, most recently, of Mojo: How to Get It, How to Keep It, How to Get it Back if You Lost It, as well as What Got You Here Won’t Get You There – the Wall Street Journal #1 best seller, and Succession: Are You Ready – published in February 2008 as part of the Harvard Business ‘Memo to the CEO’ series. Marshall is also on the faculty of the executive education programs at Dartmouth College and the University of Michigan.

This article in a different form originally appeared in Business Week.

MG: You say that how we work and live can be even more important than what we do. What do you mean by “how”?

DS: Today’s world connects us—and reveals us—in ways we have only just begun to comprehend. The flood of easily and universally accessible information has dramatically changed the dynamics and rules of business. Results are not the only barometer of success in a world in which people can also judge how you achieve those results. So notions such as “business is war,” “survival of the fittest,” “by any means necessary,” and “just do it” no longer apply; they encourage behaviors that, when discovered, threaten the very success they hope to achieve.

It is not just what we do that makes a difference; it is how we do it that matters. Through years of practice and personal observation, I’ve come to believe that how individuals and companies think, behave, and govern themselves can set them apart, facilitate stronger relationships, and enable greater successes.

MG: So, how isn’t just about how companies can protect themselves and their reputations in a new, transparent, and connected world?

DS: No, in fact, it is about just the opposite. How is about finding greater rewards by turning the specific conditions of the 21st century to your advantage. We are hyperconnected, which means we work with diverse teams of people in diverse places across the globe. We are hypertransparent. We live in a world where nothing stays hidden. Companies operating in this new world have a choice. They can either hunker down and avoid exposure or can go from defense to offense. Leaders today recognize that how we do what we do is not defensive, it is all about taking charge.

MG: Is that what you mean by out-behaving the competition?

DS: If you make something new (or just better, faster, and cheaper), you may out-perform a competitor, but the advantage is short-lived. Our whats—products, services, and processes—can be easily duplicated and reverse-engineered. Competitors can quickly improve on and deliver them at the same or an even lower price, effectively rendering almost everything a commodity.

Out-behaving the competition is about how you do what you do. If you keep promises 99% of the time and your competitor keeps theirs 80%, you can gain critical advantage in the marketplace. If your interactions with others deliver a more meaningful customer experience, you engender a loyalty that brings them back again and again.

If you make stronger connections and collaborate more intensely with your co-workers, encouraging them to take risks and innovate, you win. Our hows—our values, principles, reputations, and cultures—provide advantage and sustain us over the long term. These are the things that define how we collaborate with co-workers, how we inspire more people throughout our global networks, how we interact with—not just serve—customers. These are the things that cannot be copied.

MG: You mention a distinction between serving and interacting with customers. How is out-behaving different from good old customer service?

DS: Customer service has become commoditized. Every employee knows they must answer the phone by the third ring, greet customers with the company tagline, direct customers to goods and services, often walking with them to ensure they find the goods they are looking to buy. Out-behaving is about what happens during the walk. It’s about interacting and connecting with customers in a way that delights them and serves them in the process.

For instance, there is a donut vendor I feature in the book who trusts his customers to make their own change when making a purchase. This increases his productivity and their satisfaction, ensures customer loyalty, and wins him more customers. On a larger scale, the University of Michigan Hospitals & Health Systems made the important decision to encourage their doctors to apologize to patients when mistakes were made in their care. This act, considered legal suicide at the time, resulted in patients feeling better served, medical malpractice claims and lawsuits dropping by nearly 50%, and the per-case cost of defending remaining lawsuits dropping by 50%.

It’s important to remember that how isn’t just about gaining and keeping more customers. It’s as important in the boardroom as it is in the classroom and living room.

MG: Leadership is a key focus of several chapters in your book. What’s the call to action for CEOs and other company leaders in a how world?

DS: A leader is a model of behavior. A leader self-governs himself or herself by a set of principles and inspires others to do the same. A leader embraces the conditions of the new world and turns it to his or her advantage. I think of Bill Marriott, the 74-year-old CEO of Marriott Worldwide (MAR), who used to go from hotel to hotel with a pencil and paper taking notes for his staff. Now he blogs, embracing our new era of transparency. Instead of issuing directives for his staff to execute or regurgitating talking points from his public relations staff, he engages in true, authentic, two-way dialogue with all of his stakeholders. He is establishing a direct relationship with anyone who might want to visit one of his hotel rooms or invest in his company, building more trust and deeper connections in the process.

MG: You suggest companies can “do” culture.

DS: Just like it would be odd to think you can copy the inner workings of another family—their history, traditions, interactions—one company can’t copy another’s culture. Culture is the unique character of any organization of people. It is the sum of all of their hows. It is the way things really work, the way decisions are really made, e-mails really composed, promotions really earned and meted out, and people really treated every day.

Grasping how culture really works gives you the building blocks to develop a culture that can out-behave the competition. A culture of how uniquely transforms new conditions of our world into new opportunities. These cultures, which I refer to as “values-based and self-governing,” keep external controls peripheral to the central effort of the group, and keep everyone inspired and propelled by their central values.

MG: How does this differ in companies with multiple locations around the world?

DS: It doesn’t. The new age of connectedness has thrust us together faster than we have developed frameworks of understanding to adapt to it. Shared values can be the tie that binds different cultures and people spread far apart from one another. This is true for merged and acquired organizations, those with multiple ventures, suppliers, and partners, and those with multinational operations.

MG: Can you explain your definition of success in a how world?

DS: I believe it is virtually impossible to be inspired and generate passion unless you have an important mission. It is virtually impossible to find success directly, without pursuing something of significance. It is virtually impossible to achieve significance without being principled every step the way. It is virtually impossible to perform if you embrace profits over principles. I believe today’s business leaders understand this. The people and companies that will rise to the top today and stay on top tomorrow, who will be rewarded, promoted, and celebrated, are those that get their hows right.

MG: If people want to learn more about this perspective, where can they find you?

DS: People can find me at my own blog: www.HowsMatter.com/blog or at www.LRN.com.

Marshall Goldsmith (Marshall@MarshallGoldsmith.com) is corporate America’s preeminent executive coach and a founder of Marshall Goldsmith Partners. He is the author, most recently, of Mojo: How to Get It, How to Keep It, How to Get it Back if You Lost It, as well as What Got You Here Won’t Get You There – the Wall Street Journal #1 best seller, and Succession: Are You Ready – published in February 2008 as part of the Harvard Business ‘Memo to the CEO’ series. Marshall is also on the faculty of the executive education programs at Dartmouth College and the University of Michigan.

This article in a different form originally appeared in Business Week.

Executives have always been pressed for time. What’s changed?

Today executives have to deal with a variety of activist constituencies that include customers and shareholders, but also investigative journalists, nongovernmental organizations, enforcement agencies, boycott organizers, and others. They also have to manage and digest greater organizational complexity, new technologies, globalization, and the resultant avalanche of internal meetings, e-mail, and documents. Yet there are still only 24 hours in each day.

How does this affect relationships?

Recently, I was trying to organize a conference call between the chairman of a large professional services firm and another executive. I said to the chairman: “Let’s just get a 20-minute call organized with William.” It had been an exhausting week for him, and he said: “Andrew, you need to realize that I have about 50 people lined up here, and each one just wants ‘just’ 20 minutes with me!”

The point is that every senior executive I know could easily fill each day twice over. For every request, they are asking: “Can someone else handle this? Does this align with my most critical priorities?” They invest their time in relationships only where there is tangible value for them. Schmoozing is not dead, but there’s much less appetite for it today. Value for time, for busy executives, is now far more important than value for money.

How would you define value for time, then?

Value for time could include both giving value and getting value in a fairly brief exchange. An executive is giving value when he or she is energizing an important initiative, making a key decision, shaping the direction of a program, meeting a key customer, or perhaps mentoring a direct report. That executive is feeling: “I really used the power of my office and my experience and judgment to have an impact here.”

On the other hand, that person is getting value when learning valuable new information, being pushed to rethink a problem, getting his perspectives broadened, or making a new personal connection. Your message has to align with his or her goals and priorities. If they’re not thinking: “That was a really great use of my time,” you won’t get a second chance.

Part of it is timing also. The CEO of a major bank told me: “When someone wants a meeting with me, their topic may not be high up on my agenda that week or month. But that may change. You have to be persistent and try to find out as much as possible about my priorities.”

How would you advise someone who needs to plan time with a senior executive?

First you need to figure out what that person’s most important issues are on that day. You might even ask at the outset: “What’s the most important issue we should be discussing today?” You’d be surprised how that simple question can transform the discussion.

Then think about adding different layers of value in a conversation. First, there’s what’s called in pop music the hook—how you start the dialogue. Think of the guitar riff that introduces the Rolling Stones song Satisfaction. You’re just commanded to listen. If you don’t get the person’s attention in the first few minutes, you’ve lost the opportunity. One IT company I know told me about a recent meeting they had with the CEO of a major telco. After 15 minutes he looked at his watch and left—there was no hook, they hadn’t done their homework, and they failed to connect to his concerns.

This is consistent with my experiences of executives. What else can you do increase value for time?

Think about adding value in four categories: content or ideas, connection, personal help, and fun. The first category—ideas—is the most important: Are you bringing new information about what’s happening in the executive’s organization, or about what customers are saying? Are you making observations about the enterprise that are helping to shape his perceptions? Are you challenging an assumption? Connection can be another source of value: Can you expand his personal network? Personal help can embrace many things—advising someone’s teenager about applying to your alma mater, getting them an appointment with a hard-to-reach medical specialist, or just being a sounding board about their next career move.

Some people still like to have fun—to go to the opera or a playoff game—but often they’re just too busy, and usually this works best after you’ve delivered on the first three types of value.

What mistakes do people make?

They talk about themselves. They get mired in the details and take too long to get to the point. They act like a nervous supplicant. They try to sell rather than creating reach. They rely too heavily on props like PowerPoint slides. They focus on their own agenda rather than the other person’s needs. They are inflexible and cannot easily shift the focus of the conversation.

Other than the ‘nervous supplicant’ one, I think that in the past 30 years I have made all of the other mistakes! Given how valuable executive time has become, isn’t less really more?

Absolutely. Most people want more of an executive’s time, but when you consider the dollar value of even one minute of a CEO’s calendar, there is great value in getting results while using less of their time.

I completely agree with your philosophy. In almost every case the executive’s time has far more economic value than the time of the consultant or coach. Like you, my goal is to help my clients achieve maximum positive change—while spending the minimum amount of time needed to achieve this change. This flies in the face of the old model of ‘selling hours’ for professional services.

Andrew, How can people contact you?

I would love to hear from your readers. They can contact me at Andrew@AndrewSobel.com.

Marshall Goldsmith (Marshall@MarshallGoldsmith.com) is corporate America’s preeminent executive coach and a founder of Marshall Goldsmith Partners. He is the author, most recently, of Mojo: How to Get It, How to Keep It, How to Get it Back if You Lost It, as well as What Got You Here Won’t Get You There – the Wall Street Journal #1 best seller, and Succession: Are You Ready – published in February 2008 as part of the Harvard Business ‘Memo to the CEO’ series. Marshall is also on the faculty of the executive education programs at Dartmouth College and the University of Michigan.

This article in a different form originally appeared in Business Week.

Research shows that asking works. Howard Morgan and I recently published a study involving more than 11,000 leaders and 86,000 of their co-workers from eight major corporations.

Our findings were clear: Leaders who ask, listen, learn and consistently follow up are seen as becoming more effective. Leaders who don’t ask don’t get much better. A few years ago, Alyssa Freas joined us in a similar study with customers and discovered nearly identical results. External customer satisfaction goes up when customer service representatives ask, listen, learn and follow up.

In addition to being supported by research, asking is just common sense. When people ask us for our input, listen to us, try to learn from us and follow up to see if they are getting better, our relationship with them improves.

This seems simple and obvious—so why don’t we do it?

Reviews of summary 360-degree feedback involving thousands of leaders from more than 50 organizations have shown that when the item “Asks people what he or she can do to improve” is included in the company’s leadership inventory, it almost always falls near the bottom (if not in last place) in terms of employee satisfaction. As a rule, leaders don’t ask.

I recently asked the vice president of customer satisfaction in a major organization if his employees should be asking their key customers for feedback—listening, learning and following up to ensure service keeps getting better. “Of course,” he replied.

“How important it this to your company?” I asked. “It’s damn important!” he exclaimed.

I then lowered my voice and asked, “Have you ever asked your wife for feedback on how you can become a better husband?” He stopped, thought for a second, and sighed, “No.”

“Who is more important—your company’s customers or your wife?” I asked. “My wife, of course,” he replied.

“If you believe in asking so much, why don’t you do it at home?” I inquired. He ruefully admitted, “Because I am afraid of the answer.”

Why don’t most of us ask—even though we know we should? We don’t ask, because we are afraid of the answers.

Let me give you a personal example. I am 55 years old, and at my age, one type of input that I should be asking for every year is a physical exam. I managed to avoid this exam, for not one or two years, but seven years. How did I successfully avoid a physical exam for seven years? What did I keep telling myself? I will do it when I quit traveling so much. I’ll go after I begin my “healthy foods” diet. I will get that exam after I get in shape.

Have you ever told yourself the same thing? Who are we kidding? The doctor? Our families? No, we are only kidding ourselves.

My suggestions are very simple:

• As a leader:

Get in the habit of asking key co-workers for their ideas on what needs to be done. Thank them for their input, listen to them, learn as much as you can, incorporate the ideas that make the most sense and follow up to ensure that real, positive change is occurring.

As a coach:

Encourage the people you are coaching to ask questions, listen to the answers and learn from everyone around them. Be a great role model for learning, then ask the people you are coaching to learn in the same way that you are. As an executive coach, I find that my clients can learn a lot more from their key stakeholders than they ever learn from me.

• As a friend and family member:

Ask your loved ones how you can be a better partner, friend, parent or child. Listen to their ideas. Don’t get so busy with work that you forget that they are the most important people in your life.

Improving interpersonal relationships doesn’t have to take a lot of our time. It does require having the courage to ask for important people’s opinions and the discipline to follow up and do something about what we learn.

Who do you need to ask? What is your first question?

Marshall Goldsmith (Marshall@MarshallGoldsmith.com) is corporate America’s preeminent executive coach and a founder of Marshall Goldsmith Partners. He is the author, most recently, of Mojo: How to Get It, How to Keep It, How to Get it Back if You Lost It, as well as What Got You Here Won’t Get You There – the Wall Street Journal #1 best seller, and Succession: Are You Ready – published in February 2008 as part of the Harvard Business ‘Memo to the CEO’ series. Marshall is also on the faculty of the executive education programs at Dartmouth College and the University of Michigan.

This article in a different form originally appeared in Talent Management Magazine.