Mistake management for dummies

Yawn! Another powerful man...another downfall. The continuous failure to take responsibility for one's behavior is just boring now.

I'm not going to post about the latest example playing itself out in the media. If you're reading this, you probably know anyway. If not, take a quick look at any news site and you'll see it front and center.

Putting personal judgements about infidelity aside, I find it almost offensive that these public figures have not learned from other highly publicized atrocious mistake management.

The pattern of behavior for how mistakes are managed by powerful public figures could be published in a book called Mistake Management for Dummies. It would include:
1. Deny! Deny! Deny!
2. State that you do not know the person/people involved at all
3. State that you are sorry for your family (don't give a thought to the fact that you didn't consider them at all before you were caught)
4. State that you are taking full responsibility for your misdeeds (don't give a thought to exactly what that means, don't really do anything)
5. Shed a few tears and if they don't come easily, fake it

While some are judging these people for their infidelity, I think they should be judged for how poorly they managed their situations once they were caught.

Has Bill Clinton taught us nothing?

Haven't they learned from Martha Stewart at all? She went to PRISON! She did not go to prison for her lies. She went for covering up her lies!

We all make mistakes. We don't all make them worse by lying about them.

Here's the basic process for Mistake Management for Smarties:
Step 1: Admit it.
Step 2: Fix it.
Step 3: Don't do it again.

It seems like every executive should know by now that it is not the mistake that hurts one's reputation and career. It is how it is handled. Covering it up or blaming others does more damage than the actual error, most of the time.

Manage your mistakes like a pro. And, by "pro", I mean someone who takes responsibility, not like the highly publicized professionals in the news lately.

Gossip in the tabloids is akin to gossip in the workplace

Some say they read tabloid magazines like People, US Weekly, and National Inquirer for the "escape from the real world." I submit that All-In people don't keep up on the lives of Paris, Arnold's mistress, or the latest celeb's rehab as a way to escape their own lives.

The tabloid paparazzi prevented a child from attending his eight grade graduation last week. Granted, his father is a famous actor and former Governor, and news of his birth just came out. So what? The child should not miss his own life events because a picture of him would fetch a pretty penny.

Who pays those pretty pennies? Readers of tabloid magazines like People, US Weekly, and National Inquirer.

It used to be comical to read those rags while in line at the grocery store or at the dentist office, but the stories are no longer about aliens abducting former TV stars with three arms. The stories are about real children who are not in the spotlight.

The stories, photographs, and tabloids aren't as innocuous as they used to be.

I suspect the same people who read the tabloids for their escape are the same who gossip in the workplace. They say they don't mean anything by it, but they sure can wreck havoc.

Workplace gossip can bring down an employee in the way tabloids bring down celebrities. Companies lose hours of productivity to gossip every year, but don't assume everyone is doing it.

All-In people do not gossip. I saw a terrific example last week.

As people were gathering early for a meeting at a client's office, a woman asked another if she heard about Phyllis. The second woman said she heard Phyllis had family affected by the Joplin tornado. As the first woman responded with, "Yes, her daughter lives there with her boyfriend and kids. I don't know where the children's father is since they are getting divorced." The second woman quickly put her hand up, looked the first in the eye and said, "Oh, I don't need to know the details of Phyllis's family. All I need to know is that she needs donations and I can help her." The first woman had no response. She knew the second was not going to listen, so she stopped.

While it is not always as simple as that, there are plenty of people who see office gossip as harmful as the tabloid gossip.

When one's own life is full and rewarding, there is no need to escape it. When one is happy with oneself, there is no need to gossip. When one is focusing on doing good in their own life, there is no need to celebrate the downfall of others at work or in Hollywood.

When one lives All-In, they don't gossip about coworkers or celebrities to escape from their own lives, or to shift focus away from themselves, or to harm someone else's reputation. Do they?

What do you think: is reading tabloids harmless fun? Is office gossip harmless too?

CNN is not a news organization

It is official: CNN is not a serious news organization.

A serious news organization would not have a story encouraging readers to revisit the sex tape scandal of two reality TV stars. On its front page.

Going in to an election cycle, if it wants to be taken seriously, CNN should stop pandering.

CNN: Do Better!

You are who you are

He was called a man of integrity, the kind of coach you would want your son to play for. But, over the weekend Ohio State's football coach, Jim Tressel, resigned amid a cheating scandal. In fact, Sports Illustrated described Tressel as having committed "the most egregious of sins for a coach in the eyes of college sports' ruling body".

When he was caught for misdeeds in the past, Tressel claimed ignorance of the rules. It does not appear that excuse will stand this time. This time, it appears he is saying he did it for the good of the boys on his team.

Is it acceptable to ignore rules for the sake of individual players, or one team?

No, it is not.

When Tressel became the coach of an NCAA-regulated team sport, he became obligated to know the rules and abide by all of them, even those he disliked.

The same is true for leaders of companies.

Once you join your company, you take an implicit oath to its Mission and rules. If you do not like the rules or the way the company performs, work to change them. Selecting to ignore them is not an option someone of integrity chooses.

You are who you are. If you have integrity, you have it all the time. If you make a mistake, own up to it. Covering it up and lying, which Tressel is charged with, are not actions someone with integrity chooses.

You are who you are. If you have integrity, you have it all the time. You don't turn a blind eye to the rules you dislike, the way some financial executives did in recent years.

You are who you are. You don't steal someone's business idea, call it your own, and take it to market, the way a local business person did in recent years.

You are who you are. If you lack integrity, even once, your reputation will suffer along with your relationships. Although you may not face a disciplinary board for each infraction, like Tressel will in August, your peers and coworkers judge just the same. They will see you for who you are and will distrust you accordingly.

When you look in the mirror at the end of each day, you know who you are. You know if you are working toward the company Mission, giving equal work for the pay given you. You know if you are breaking the rules, covering it up, and lying. Even if you justify such behavior, you know deep down that your behavior and integrity are out of alignment. You know it and those around you know it.

You are who you are, whether you like it or not.


More about Tressel:
Sports Illustrated: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/football/ncaa/05/30/tressel.resigns/