Skip to main content

How Should We View A Leader Who Can't Make Work More Compelling Than Bowling?

Here's an assignment for all you hospital leaders: stand by your employee entrance in the morning, the door where most employees arrive at work. Observe facial expressions, tone of voice and body language.

What do you see? All too often it's the drudgery of coming to work made visible.

Now do the same exercise at the same door as employees leave work. Compare facial expressions, tone of voice and body language to what you observed that morning.

At this hour, I'm betting you'll see the excitement of LEAVING work made visible. The excitement of leaving a job that doesn't fulfill, on behalf of an organization not trusted, in the service of a strategy not understood. The happiness and engagement of leaving all that because something better awaits. Bowling, maybe.

Why is it that employees show far more passion for their hobbies and sporting activities than their work - where they spend the majority of their energy and waking hours? How is it that so many organizations utterly fail to engage their employees' hearts and minds, their passions and longings, in the essential pursuit of MEANING - something beyond a paycheck?

And what does it say about a leader who can't make WORK more compelling than BOWLING?

Are you KIDDING me?



Labels:

Comments

Dave Grinnell said…
If more healthcare organizations took care of employees by helping them improve their interpersonal and communication skills, they would find their staff would feel their work is fulfilling and fun. I've written over 150 letters to healthcare executives, and not one has indicated interest in new skills training for healthcare. Are they, too, just apathetic?
September 18, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Michael Porter On Health Care Reform

Michael Porter, writing in the New England Journal of Medicine, proposes "A Strategy For Health Care Reform - Toward A Value-Based System." His proposals are fundamental, lucid and right-on, meaning they're sure to be opposed by some parties to the debate, the so-called "Yes, but..." crowd. Most important, in my opinion, is this: "... electronic medical records will enable value improvement, but only if they support integrated care and outcome measurement. Simply automating current delivery practices will be a hugely expensive exercise in futility. Among our highest near-term priorities is to finalize and then continuously update health information technology (HIT) standards that include precise data definitions (for diagnoses and treatments, for example), an architecture for aggregating data for each patient over time and across providers, and protocols for seamless communication among systems. "Finally, consumers must become much mor
Post a Comment
Read more

Being Disrupted Ain't Fun. Deal With It.

Articles about disrupting healthcare, particularly those analogizing, say, Tesla's example with healthcare's current state, are frequently met with a chorus of (paraphrasing here) "Irrelevant! Cars are easy, healthcare is hard." You know, patients and doctors as examples of "information asymmetry" and all that. Well, let me ask you this: assuming you drive a car with a traditional internal combustion engine, how much do you know about the metallurgy in your car's engine block? I'll bet the answer is: virtually nothing. In fact it's probably less than you know about your own body's GI tract. Yet somehow, every day, us (allegedly) ignorant people buy and drive cars without help from a cadre of experts. Most of us do so and live happily ever after (at least until the warranty expires. Warranties...another thing healthcare could learn from Tesla.) Now, us free range dummies - impatient with information asymmetry - are storming healthcare
Post a Comment
Read more

My Take On Anthem-Cigna, Big Dumb Companies and the Executives Who Run Them

After last Friday's Appeals Court decision, Anthem's hostile takeover of, er, merger with Cigna has but a faint pulse. Good. Unplug the respirator. Cigna's figured it out but Anthem is like that late-late horror show where the corpse refuses to die. Meanwhile, 150 McKinsey consultants are on standby for post-merger "integration" support. I guess "no deal, no paycheck..." is powerfully motivating to keep the patient alive a while longer. In court, Anthem argued that assembling a $54 billion behemoth is a necessary precondition to sparking all manner of wondrous innovations and delivering $2.4 billion in efficiencies. The basic argument appears to be "We need to double in size to grow a brain. And just imagine all those savings translating directly into lower premiums for employers and consumers."  Stop. Read that paragraph again. Ignore the dubious "lower premiums" argument and focus on the deal's savings. $2.4 billion saved
Post a Comment
Read more