Is your HR Department smarter than the Nobel Committee?
 Subscribe to the Three Star Leadership Blog |
| The Working Supervisor's Support Kit is a collection of information and tools to help working supervisors do a better job. It's based on what Wally's learned in over twenty years of supervisory skills training. |
| Follow me on Twitter |
| For weekly tips and resources pointers, check Wally's Three Star Leadership Letter |
| Find out more about having Wally speak to your company or convention. |
| Find out more about Wally's coaching services. |
 |
The committee that awards the Nobel Peace prize announced that this year's prize would go to President Barack Obama. Since nominations needed to be in by February 1, this means that Mr. Obama was nominated after being President for less than two weeks.
Perhaps the committee was looking at his performance as president over the last eight and a half months. If so, they're applying a far different standard than they have in the past.
Last year's recipient, Martti Ahtisaari, was cited "for his important efforts, on several continents and over more than three decades, to resolve international conflicts."
Jimmy Carter, the last US President to receive the prize, was honored in 2002. He had left the Presidency over twenty years before.
Prof. Muhammad Yunus, who received the prize in 2006, founded his Grameen Bank thirty years before.
Clearly, the committee was basing its judgment on potential and possibility. But before you go getting all giggly and feeling superior, consider that most "high potential" programs in corporate America do pretty much the same thing.
In most cases men and women are designated "high potential" well before they've actually achieved anything. As a result, we shower them with training. We offer them the developmental assignments and opportunities.
Naturally, with that help and support, our "high potentials" do quite well. We take this as proof of our sage selection process, but it's more like the fact that the part of the garden you weed and fertilize has the plants that grow the most.
Maybe we'll get lucky and that will happen with this Peace Prize. Maybe the prize will occasion more opportunities for Mr. Obama to work for sensible and sustainable peace. Maybe the prize will humble him and embolden him at once.
Maybe we'll get lucky and there will be progress toward some real peace. If that happens, I won't care much who got this prize and why.
Wally's Working Supervisor's Support Kit is a collection of information and tools to help working supervisors do a better job. It's based on what Wally's learned in over twenty years of supervisory skills training. Click here to check it out.
Categories: leadership development,Leadership
Tags: Leadership Development Leadership
You regularly write thoughtful and helpful posts.
This is one of your best. Thank you.
Reply to this
Thank you for those kind words.
Reply to this
Wally, I have to disagree with you on this one. And the reason for this one is simple, language. Over at my site I just posted "Nobel's Extraordinary Peace Prize." I state, "What I do find surprising is the language surrounding this special award. I’ve underlined the key words above and a very clear pattern emerges. President Obama’s efforts were extraordinary, vs. untiring, important, their, and her efforts in previous years.
Language is important. It gets to the heart of the matter. And this is no different for the Nobel Peace Price. Nobel was an extraordinary man. However, I’m uncertain at this point of his political career, whether “extraordinary” truly defines President Obama’s contribution to world peace."
Reply to this
Thanks for commenting, Rodney. I've read your post. In answer to the question you pose at the end. I think that President Obama has done nothing significant enough or made efforts over a long enough period to merit at award of this magnitude. For me it's like nominating a football player for MVP on draft day and making the award after second game of the season. I don't intend that as a knock on the President, the time frame is too short and there are no accomplishments of note. There is, in my view, only potential so far.
Reply to this
I like your football analogy - it really puts it in perspective. Thanks...
Reply to this
Agree or disagree with your point, I love it when people take a thoughtful and respectful stance on something they believe in. Kudos to you for that, Wally. Bret
Reply to this
Thanks, Bret. One of the things I love about this blog is that we got lots of thoughtful comments.
Reply to this
Wally,
Brilliant as usual. Your boldness to call "foul" on a prize provided much too early make you qualified for the next Peace Price in 2010. I was quite amazed and disturbed at the same time to see an overly/outwardly prestigious award be given for political and more political reasons.
While Obama has scoured the planet apologizing for America's ill will of the past couple centuries, I find it amazing that the committee of Nobel had the audacity to provide Obama the award based on "what" he should do. This provides a very dangerous landscape for our President in the remaining years of his Presidency.
When I can go to the supermarket and not see the Obamas littered throughout the newspaper racks, or see our unemployment numbers begin to decline because of sound business decisions, or I don't have to watch in sadness as our troops from Fort Carson are brought home in steel caskets draped in American flags will I begin to take Obama seriously. I believe he's been a better celebrity (late night, etc.) than President up to this point. Obama should hand over his Nobel Peace prize to the American military, as they have truly fought for peace.
The funny thing is, I had just written a post on Tom Asaker's site about the Nobel Peace prize. Much like you, I was pointing to the hype of a 1st round draft pick (quarterback) that had signed a huge contract and enjoyed much of the preseason hype. Little to everyone's dismay, the young/inexperienced QB was taking spotlights from the team and hadn't even played a down of pro football.
Love your blog,
Scott
Reply to this
Thanks, Scott, for the comments and the kind words. The Nobel committee is what it is and their deed is done. Now we have to answer one of my mother's favorite questions: "What good can we make of this?" That will be mostly up to President Obama. Let's hope it's something good.
Reply to this
I liked your reference to the "high potential." I just read a case study for my MBA class, "Compensation and Performance Evaluation at Arrow," and the CEO said that "high potential" employees need higher evaluation scores because they needed to differentiate them from the "ordinary" employees. The CEO was trying to make the perfect evaluation process, but he ultimately goes against his own values to make the movers and shakers look better. That is exactly what President Obama received, a higher evaluation. Good post and thanks for letting me post a comment.
Reply to this
I bet that was an interesting case study. It does seem like things ought to work the other way, that high evaluations get you preferment and not the reverse. Part of that problem is rooted in the practice at most companies where "expectations" are defined in terms of an individual and what's expected, rather than in terms of a specific set of tasks that the person should perform to a specified and common standard.
I would prefer that we grade performance on the small number of tasks that a team member is required to perform. You don't meet the standard until you do that consistently without close supervision. We should grade performance on a team member's playing by the rules and chippig in to help other team members. We could add a third category for growth where "expectations" matter.
Reply to this
Interesting observation, Wally. It will be interesting to see how the impact of high performance expectations come to bear in the rest of Obama's presidency...
I've shared your observations with my readers in my weekly Rainmaker 'Fab Five' blog picks of the week (found here: http://www.maximizepossibility.com/employee_retention/2009/10/the-rainmaker-fab-five-blog-picks-of-the-week-1.html).
Thanks for the great read!
Reply to this
Thanks, Chris. It's always an honor to be selected for your weekly list.
Reply to this
Perhaps the Nobel committee gave our president an "A" in the same way that Ben Zander, in "The Art of Possibility" gives his music students an "A" at the beginning of the semester, based on intent, not actual results.
Of course the Nobel committee is playing in a much bigber field here, and it will be interesting to see how the "Art of Possibility" works for world peace.
Reply to this
Thanks, Mary Jo. It will be interesting, indeed. And it will be an intriguing test of leadership. It will certainly affect what the President is able to do, especially outside the US. What I'm watching is how it may affect what the President chooses to do.
Reply to this
Wally, the discussion around the world regarding the Nobel Peace Prize is astounding. In my blog today, I took a different perspective - one focused on business. If anything, illustrates to business leaders how prizes and awards should not be awarded. I stated:
"Don’t let this happen to you and the awards you extend to those around you for exempilary service. Be certain you can authenically convey the reason and a corresponding message for extending the award. If you can’t, the significance of the award will be diminished."
I always find it interesting how there are so many examples of "how not to" in the world.
Reply to this
Thanks Rodney. That's a good lesson for those who offer rewards. It's truly a lesson you can learn from the Nobel Peace Prize 2009.
Reply to this
There is a real danger in giving out awards for potential. I understand your point about that self-fulfilling prophecy that is training "high-potentials" The case here is different, though. As are world grows quicker and quicker we lose our ability to look forward and backward for very far. We look to the future and want things to be here NOW. We look to the past and have short memories. Prizes like the Nobel and others allow us to treasure proven track records and remember who we want to call heroes and why. The real danger lies in Mr Obama (and his team) to grow arrogant and think they have it made. I sincerely hope, as you do, that it will "humble him and embolden him at once" and he might just be the man to pull that off! He will need to keep his eye on reality and remember that his legacy is in the building. Only time will tell.
Reply to this
Thanks, Monica. Evidently I didn't plant my tongue firmly enough in my cheek or I didn't make my point clearly enough. I find it amusing (not to mention scary) that hi po programs shower opportunities and support on people and then see their development as proof that they picked the winners from amongst the rest. It's the Pygmalion Effect writ large.
Reply to this