What Makes Me Feel Good About Work?

To borrow a term from Dan Ariely, in his 2013 TED Talk “What Makes Us Feel Good About Our Work”, I can definitively state that I work in a “knowledge economy” and have done so for my entire career, both as an Air Force Officer and as a defense support contractor and consultant. As Mr. Ariely said, in a knowledge economy, it takes much more than money to motivate people (certainly to motivate me) at work. Don’t get me wrong, I would always like to make more money but if I am honest about it, the type of work that I would do would have to be something that I really liked – something that had meaning to me – before I would change jobs or (especially) career fields. To say that money has little to no effect on me is not entirely accurate, but meaningful and fulfilling work is also a significant determinant of what I am willing to do for a living. In that sense, I feel fortunate because I have always had the luxury of a career rather than merely having a job that I had to do to put food on the table. I have been blessed to be able to perform meaningful work instead of having to do something that perhaps I may not have liked because I needed a paycheck and had no other choice.

This is not to say that I have always, and every day, loved my work. Acquisition program management in the Department of Defense can prove extremely frustrating when you deal with bureaucracy; you may even have a project in which you have investigated a great deal of time, effort, and care thrown on the trash heap in an instant. Sometimes that is just the way things happen, or so it would seem, and the aftermath leaves you quite discouraged, angry, even ready to quit. But, more often than not, I have also been blessed to see the things that I poured my heart and soul into turn out to be successful. A major acquisition strategy briefing was approved and even praised, an entire fleet of aircraft was delivered to an operational command – a group of pilots and maintainers – and is flying missions today, to everything in between has been the result of work that I have done. I should hasten to add that I never did anything entirely on my own but, as I enjoy the most, always with a team of similarly motivated professionals.

As an Air Force Officer, my most enjoyable and intrinsically rewarding times came through the leadership of teams, or entire organizations, on a successful project or program. I especially enjoyed the challenge of taking a program that was in trouble (over budget, behind schedule, and/or not meeting its technical performance requirements) and turning it around. When I took over programs that were seemingly hopeless, and made them successful, I felt as though I was doing not only meaningful work but also doing what I was “born to do”. I thrive on challenges and even chaos, meeting those challenges, and turning chaos into the orderly execution of an acquisition program. I’ll give you an example of one mental and physical challenge that I will never forget.

Back in 2001, when I was assigned to the Joint Strike Fighter (now the F-35) program and we were in source selection to select the winning contractor of the competition to enter the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase of the program, I was working especially late one evening with one other guy still in the office. Around 9:30 in the evening, the Marine Corps two-star general who was the Program Director at the time came into the office and told me that he wanted me to brief the senior acquisition leadership of both the Air Force and Navy the following morning at 8:00. He wanted a detailed briefing on my (and my team’s) work on avionics open systems architecture – what we had learned, and what we thought about the contractor’s demonstrated abilities in that area. He told me that I could brief whatever I wanted and what I thought was right. As he left, he said that I needed to be in his office the next morning at 6:00 to go over my briefing. The two of us left in the office looked at each other and said simultaneously, “It Looks like we’re working!” We finished the briefing and left the office at 2:30 in the morning, then drove the 43 miles back to the commuter lot where I had left my car at 5:00 the previous morning. I drove to my house, took an hour nap, shaved, and put on a fresh uniform, and met my ride in the same commuter lot at 4:30. We were in the general’s office by 6:00, and I began my briefing promptly at 8:00. The senior leadership proved extremely interested in what I had to say; they asked many questions and my briefing lasted 90 minutes. It was among the best briefings that I ever gave and when it was over, I felt elated! Then the fatigue set in and the rest of the day felt almost endless until I could get back home and get some sleep. But I was motivated! I felt extremely good about what I was doing and had done. These are the kinds of challenges I lived for.

Now retired from the military and working as a defense support contractor/consultant, I don’t get nearly the thrills that I used to get as a leader in the military. My role now is generally advisory; I generate reports, I work with some pretty massive spreadsheets dealing with budgetary issues, and I provide advice to senior leaders. But so long as my work and my advice are appreciated and put to good use, I find great satisfaction in what I do. I am in a spot where I am paid sufficiently well that the issue of money is off the table and all that is left are the intrinsic motivators. As always, I do what I do first and foremost to provide for my family. But beyond that, I do what I do because I believe in the objectives of our program and I believe that my work adds value. If it were otherwise, I would be looking for other work.

I am also at the stage now where I have a strong desire to give back to the profession, so I mentor junior government civilian and military members who work with me. I enjoy teaching them about program management, and I enjoy seeing them succeed in part because of the help that I was able to give them. For me, it has always been about achieving the mission or objectives in a team setting. Seeing a new aircraft parked on the ramp and knowing that I had something to do with putting it there gives me a feeling of deep satisfaction. And the brilliant and motivated people that I have had the privilege of meeting and working with across the years has made my work so much more interesting. I have had opportunities and experiences that many people my age have never had. These things have kept me motivated throughout my career as both an Officer and a civilian.

Supportive Communication

A520.4.3.RB - Supportive Communication

As a leader, the quality of your communications with your subordinates, team, or staff, and your boss is crucial to developing and maintaining the kinds of relationships that you need to both get the job done and foster a healthy work environment for all concerned. One’s workplace should be pleasant, with only healthy stress in the air. This blog will reflect on eight key aspects of effective and healthy communication practices that will help you to establish the good relationships that you require. These eight characteristics of supportive communication are mutually reinforcing. Imagine receiving the following email from your CEO in your Inbox on a Monday morning:

“We are getting less than 40 hours of work from a large number of our EMPLOYEES. The parking lot is sparsely used at 8:00 A.M.; likewise at 5 P.M. As managers – you either do not know what your EMPLOYEES are doing, or you do not CARE. You have created expectations on the work effort that allowed this to happen inside [fill in the blank Company], creating a very unhealthy environment. In either case, you have a problem and you will fix it or I will replace you. NEVER in my career have I allowed a team that worked for me to think they had a 40-hour job. I have allowed YOU to create a culture that is permitting this. NO LONGER.”

Would you, as a manager or supervisor, think, “Wow, I must really be doing a bad job in motivating and managing my employees; I need to get better!” I think not. The first thing that I would think…well, I can’t say that here…the second thing that I would think is probably along the lines of “leadership neither understands nor appreciates the hard work and good job that I and my people do here.” I’d be angry and defensive. I might also be fearful of a vindictive and vengeful CEO who has just destabilized my work environment. The leadership is really watching the parking lot as a measure of how well they think we’re doing our jobs? “What an idiot; how did this guy get to be the CEO?” I would also instantly notice the words in all-capital letters and interpret those as meaning that the leadership clearly thinks that all of us employees are second-class citizens (and expendable at a moment’s notice). I was taught a long time ago that using all capital letters in an email is tantamount to shouting at someone. The tone is clearly condescending and threatening to say the least. Leadership here has set up an us-versus-them relationship with all of the mid-level managers and workers. It is a classic example of disconfirmation, where the workforce will feel significantly put down, unappreciated, valueless, and insignificant. In short, I would never write an email anywhere close to the one above; not if I wanted a productive, motivated, and stable workforce. Furthermore, I’d start looking for a new job with a healthy, intelligent, caring hierarchy of leaders who had a clue.

To be effective, especially when dealing with a contentious situation, communication must be supportive. One characteristic of effective communication is “congruence” where the communication (both verbal and non-verbal) exactly matches your intended message. Congruence goes a long way to establishing sincerity as perceived by the receiver(s) of the communication. This is not to say that if you are angry, you should send angry emails or speak in anger to someone. Cool down first, collect your thoughts, decide on a productive way in which to approach the situation, then prepare your message. Incongruence is the opposite possibility where, perhaps without your conscious knowledge, you may be angry but trying to be objective and respectful in your communication; the anger nonetheless comes through to the receiver, making you appear less than genuine or trustworthy. Congruence enables the development of supportive relationships. Think through what you intend to say, be honest with yourself about how you are feeling, and make sure that your actual message and your intended message are in synch. Never react to an email that has made you angry by replying in kind. Take the high road in your response, if a response is even warranted, and keep negative emotion out of your writing.

Another quality of supportive communication is that it is descriptive rather than evaluative. A message that comes across as evaluative means exactly what the term says: you are evaluating or judging others negatively, which almost guarantees a defensive response or emotion from the receiver(s). Descriptive, on the other hand, refers to a message that is objective in that it sticks to the facts without ascribing any blame or negative assessment to another person or group. Descriptive communication greatly facilitates the quality of congruence as discussed above. In being descriptive, you describe what the situation is and not anything about the person or persons involved. In other words, there is no inference of negativity toward anyone. Thinking through the facts, and again removing the emotion, to state only the “what” of the matter will help ensure that your communication is descriptive and enable you to then talk about what “we” (important that it is a team effort) need to do to improve or solve the problem.

Closely related to descriptive versus evaluative, your message should focus on the problem and not on the person (or persons) involved. This is another facilitator of objectivity and congruence. If your communication is problem-oriented (not person-oriented), then chances are you are being descriptive (not evaluative) and your message is much more likely to avoid sounding like an evaluation of an individual or group. Again, focusing on the person will only get you a defensive reaction. Problem-oriented communication sticks to the facts and avoids the inference of blame; this in turn sets you up for a “we” type discussion of how to effectively resolve the problem.

Supportive communication seeks to validate a person or group by recognizing people’s positive contribution, their importance, and their worth to the organization or the project at hand. Any communication that invalidates someone will instantly become contentious. People who do not feel valued will never give you their best effort, and certainly not their loyalty. Even when facing a problem, you must begin by assuring folks that they are highly valued and that there is certainly nothing at all personal involved or at stake. Avoid condescension, edicts, being impersonal or impervious in your verbal and written communication. If people feel as though they are being talked down to, given rigid orders or ultimatums, are not recognized as anything more than a number, or their feelings and opinions do not count, you have set yourself up for failure as a leader. Show respect for your people, solicit their inputs, allow them to talk instead of making the communication strictly one-way. This fosters a “we are in this together and I need your help” atmosphere, and people will give you their best.

Make your communication specific so that you are understood. Vague or “global” messages will cause your people to read (or hear) your message and interpret it in their own way, or fill in the blanks, and your intended message will become distorted. Vagueness engenders uneasiness among employees; it may foster distrust as if you have a hidden agenda or don’t really know what you are talking about. People look for clear, unambiguous messages so they know what they are dealing with. Messages that are specific, concise, and objective speak to a strong, decisive leader who cares enough about his or her people to tell it like it is.

Tie what you say to something that has come before. Anchor your message with the message(s) you receive, whether in a two-way verbal conversation or through exchange of emails. This is known as “conjunctive” communication. It seeks to join what you are saying with what your people are saying so that you are not talking past each other. Conjunctive communication makes it easy for people to identify with your message because it ties in with what they know or believe. Conjunctive communication also helps people to feel understood and therefore validated.

Own what you say. Say “I” think, feel, believe, perceive, etc. Avoid references to the ubiquitous “they” or “It was decided that” wording. If you are sending a message, shouldn’t you refer to yourself directly as the sender? Owning your message avoids the perception of ambiguity or a hidden agenda. Your people are interested in what you have to say; if you fail to own your message, you will come across as bureaucratic or institutional and your people will tune you out. In other words, don’t make your messages sound like a policy document.

Finally, listen. Actively listen. Engage with the person or group; give the communication your full attention and avoid interrupting other people. Listen to understand, not to merely respond. Through your verbal and non-verbal actions, let people know that you are keenly interested in what they have to say and that you have a strong desire to thoroughly understand what they are telling you. When it’s your turn to speak, ask clarifying questions and remember to be conjunctive. You may also wish to avoid trying to solve the problem right then and there, but rather to ensure that you gather your people’s full message, as they intended, and think about what they said before engaging in analysis and problem solving. If you try too soon to solve the problem, you may shut someone down and miss the full extent of what they are trying to tell you. Also, avoid making judgements in your mind about what is being said; that will make you distracted. Focus on gathering the information coming your way.

It’s safe to say that the email quoted at the beginning did none of the eight things that I just described about supportive communication. Don’t ever write an email like that or you will permanently lose the respect, loyalty, and best efforts of your people. Instead, practice and be mindful of: 1) congruence, 2) being descriptive, 3) remaining problem-oriented, 4) validation of individuals, 5) being specific, 6) being conjunctive, 7) owning your message, 8) good listening. One wrong move in any one of these eight areas and you may never get a chance to recover.