Guest Blog by Patrick Hogan, CEO of Handle.com
When a construction business has projects and teams scattered on multiple sites, it is quite challenging for project managers to stay on top of things. The conventional method of construction project management involves managers traveling from one work site to another to check with the employees and get updated on the progress of projects. However, this process has changed with the introduction of remote management technology.
Burnout is defined as "a prolonged response to chronic emotional and interpersonal stressors on the job. It is defined by the three dimensions of exhaustion, cynicism, and professional inefficacy." (C. Maslach, MP Leiter, Stress: Concepts, Cognition, Emotion, and Behavior. 2016).
According to Gallup research and their 2018 report on burnout, 23% of employees reported feeling burned out at work very often or always, while an additional 44% reported feeling burned out sometimes. That means about two-thirds of full-time workers experience burnout on the job."
When you abdicate control of your time and priorities by succumbing to the hoards of distractions and fires that can permeate your day, you leave yourself open to the possibility of burnout.
Here are 3 simple changes you can make right away to regain control of your time and priorities so you can avoid burnout.
Someone may appear to be productive when in fact they are just busy with activities, or ‘inputs’. Real effectiveness is defined by results, or outputs. Inputs are more about what Leader-Managers do, whereas outputs are about the measurable results they achieve. When leader-managers confuse the two, they can find themselves spinning their wheels.
Before evaluating whether a person is effective in their job, we must first define what their job is in terms of results and outputs.
Imagine telling an employee to make their presentation better. They might respond by giving you a presentation full of pretty images that leaves key messaging obscure, if it was even there to begin with. Job descriptions are often no different, and provide an ambiguous list of duties for which an employee is responsible.
When we fail to clearly defining roles and outputs, we can’t expect leader-managers to deliver on the results that matter. To measure effectiveness and evaluate performance objectively, we must first list the specific outputs the job will require.
Traditional performance reviews have moved far off the mark in growing, engaging and retaining talent. The entrenched practice is too focused on a one, maybe two times per year sit down with a laundry list of inconsequential feedback with ratings that put more weight on personality than on results. Creating frequent feedback touchpoints is far more effective for Leader-Managers, and more engaging for employees. It’s time performance reviews got reinvented. The way we work is simply not the same anymore.
For many organizations, we are just a few months away from the dreaded mid-year performance review season. Often perceived as an administrative burden at best, Leader-Managers rarely look forward to these. More disconcerting is that they feel ill-equipped to provide constructive feedback.
The traditional year-end appraisal method, developed decades ago, is clearly not effective anymore.
Accenture’s 2016 survey found only 34% of the 2,100 respondents see current performance management approach supporting business objectives. 89% believed their performance would significantly improve if performance management were changed.
One of the most common reasons for business failure is lack of team alignment. Leaders can set out brilliant strategic objectives, but without clear direction on how these translate into aligned individuals’ objectives and activities, success can remain elusive.
Strategic alignment continues to be a hot topic in many executive offices. Its definition is hardly a point of contention: Getting all the organization to focus on the right results and activities that drive strategy.
Alignment is the synergy that’s achieved when strategy, goals, and activities work as an integrated system, reinforcing one another top-down and across the organization. That is why alignment sits at the core of organizational effectiveness: Getting the right things done.
Teams in different functions tend to have their own worldview, different processes on what to prioritize and how to allocate resources. Getting each team to work together around a unified purpose and a shared vision can be challenging.
As one leader found: “I thought my team was perfectly aligned until I asked five of them what our top priorities are. I got five different answers.”