TV’s Ur-boss, Michael Scott of The Office, a paradigm of what not to do as a leader—like imprisoning your staff in a conference room to prove that work is better than jail. But while there is the ring of truth in his incompetence, the actual truth is always more interesting than fiction.

Therefore, as you prepare to be a boss in your own new company, I present 11 demotivational lessons inspired by an actual Michael Scott I used to work for. I hope they provide a manifesto of poor leadership you can post, like Martin Luther’s on the church door, to the whiteboard of your own Dunder Mifflin executive. Or at least that you can slide into his/her inbox when no one is looking.

1. Change your mind. Change it several times a day. When reviewing a report, be sure to make comments that run counter to previous ones. Leave the employees guessing. It keeps them alert.

2. Be sure your employees don’t know what's important to you. You want the best work possible, period. You don’t want them cutting corners just because something isn’t very important. Everything is important. Always.

3. If you don’t like it, you don’t like it. You don’t have to explain. They just need to make it “better.” If you give them too much direction, how will they learn? For example: “I don’t know what you want from me, just make the PowerPoint ‘sexier.’”

4. Bring your employees along to all your meetings. But don't let them speak. By not talking, they have to listen. Just like a Dictaphone. Then they can remind you of anything you napped through.

5. Thank your employees — but only for efforts below their skill level. “Thank you for showing up today.” “Nice handwriting on that expense report.” Begin the staff meeting by thanking the intern for comb-binding your files.

6. Schedule weekly “all hands” meetings that require half the employees to travel (to you, of course). Agenda: they bring you up to date on what they’ve been emailing you, but you’ve been too busy to read. Don't introduce anything new.

7. Ask your tech savvy employees to take time from their projects to set up your home computer, preferably when the maid is there. Ideally, the request includes troubleshooting your kids' iPods.

8. Agree to deadlines and then accelerate them. Ask loudly from the hallway if the document is ready at 4:59pm. Announce: “I’m here late tonight if you want to finish it up.”

9. Schedule "critical" meetings a few days before Christmas. Require random employees from around the world to attend. Show up late and decide everyone can reconvene to "close the open issues" on January 2nd.

10. Send emails at 2am. On Sunday. Mark them urgent.

11. Be careful not to get too wrapped up in your employee’s own goals. If you're too supportive in helping them develop, they’ll leave you for another job. And that’s not good management.

How about you? Do you have any bosses that have embodied any or all of my how-not-to list? Have you been guilty of any of these yourself? What do you have to add?

A Comment in Response:

You've struck a painful cord. I couldn't agree more with every single thing you've listed. However, based on my personal experience I'd like to add few more things.

1. Having judgements clouded by personal animosities and friendships.
2. Raising status of incompetent individuals to that of key management members on the basis of personal likes and dislikes.
3. Communicating with just "one" management member instead of all key people regarding company's progress and updates.
4. Constantly wrapped up in scheming and manipulation thus creating distrust among team members.
5. Instead of praising employees several years of hardwork, retaliate with demoralizing comments such as are you a good manager?
6. Accusing competent people of 'constantly complaining when they approach the boss with their grievances.
7. Believing in the philosophy of promise them everything but give them nothing.
8. Complete centralization of power.

- DeTimes

Lack of authority and an inability to see where their contribution fits into the big picture is leaving Generation Y, or Millennials, disengaged and disenchanted with work.

Surveying more than 7,500 people and interviewing 40 HR and line managers, the report found that lack of seniority appears to be the problem: put simply, “Senior executives are generally more engaged than frontline managers or individuals.”

In a worldwide survey, they compared engagement levels of Baby Boomers (B.1946-1964), Gen X (B.1965-1977) and Gen Y (B.1978-1990).

Defining “full engagement” as: “an alignment of maximum job satisfaction (’I like my work and do it well’) with maximum job contribution (’I help achieve the goals of my organisation’)”, it found Gen Y employees wanting, especially in south-east Asia and China. Levels of disengagement are shown below.

Most feel under-used and not connected to the organisation’s overall strategy, and are struggling to define what it is they want from their work, says the survey.

The UK’s millennials are also showing signs of restlessness. They want ‘more opportunities to do what I do best’, with career development and training also highly important. The majority trust their managers, but the least engaged feel bosses could do more to encourage and reward them. Only 48 per cent of all of the Britons surveyed trust their senior leaders, though.

Contrast this with India, where engagement levels are high across the age categories and fairly consistent across job titles. We suggest this is a result of India’s dynamic, knowledge-based business culture.

Disengaged Gen Y’ers may either just look for another job or — potentially worse — stay, complain and not produce. It may be possible to coach them to higher levels of engagement. If not, the verdict’s tough: “Their exit benefits everyone including themselves.”

- DeTimes

Salovey and Mayer defined EQ in terms of being able to monitor and regulate one's own and others' feelings, and to use feelings to guide thought and action. While they have continued to fine-tune the theory, Daniel Goleman has adapted their model into a version that he finds most useful in understanding how these talents matter in work life. His adaptation which  appears in his work "Emotional Intelligence-why it can matter more than IQ" includes the following five basic emotional and social competencies :

Self-awareness : Knowing what we are feeling in the moment, and using those preferences to guide our decision making; having a realistic assessment of our own abilities and a well-grounded sense of self-confidence

Self-regulation : Handling our emotions so that they facilitate rather than interfere with the task at hand; being conscientious and delaying gratification to pursue goals; recovering well from emotional distress

Motivation : Using our deepest preferences to move and guide us toward our goals, to help us take initiative and strive to improve, and to persevere in the face of setbacks and frustrations

Empathy : Sensing what people are feeling, being able to take their perspective, and cultivating rapport and attunement with a broad diversity of people.

Social Skills : Handling emotions in relationships well and accurately reading social situations and networks; interacting smoothly; using these skills to persuade and lead, negotiate and settle disputes, for cooperation and teamwork.

- DeTimes

If the driving force of intelligence in the twentieth-century business has been IQ, then-in accordance to growing evidence - in the twenty-first century it will be EQ, and related and practical forms of practical and creative intelligence. This "new" intelligence is the heart-level engine that drives human capital and produces the exceptional, creative work required for any company to lead the field amidst the turbulence and confusion of global market changes. In this note, we attempt to understand Emotional Intelligence.

"Emotional Intelligence" refers to the capacity for recognising our own feelings and those of others, for motivating ourselves, and for managing emotions well in ourselves and in our relationship. It describes abilities distinct from, but complementary to academic intelligence, the purely cognitive capacities measured by IQ. Many people who are book-smart but lack EQ end up working for people who have lower IQs than them but who excel in EQ skills.

These two different kinds of intelligence -intellectual and emotional-express the activity of different parts of the brain. The intellect is based on the working of the neocortex, the more recently evolved layers at the top of the brain. The emotional centres are lower in the brain, in the more ancient subcortex; EQ involves these emotional centres at work, in concert with the intellectual centres.

Among the most influential theorists of intelligence to point out the distinction between intellectual and emotional capacities was Howard Garner, a Harvard psychologist, who in 1983 proposed a widely regarded model of "multiple intelligence". His lists seven kinds of intelligence included not just the familiar verbal and maths abilities, but also two " personal " varieties: knowing one's inner world and social adeptness.

A comprehensive theory of EQ was proposed in 1990 by two psychologists, Peter Salovey, at Yale, and John Mayer, now at the University of New Hampshire. Another pioneering model of EQ was proposed in the 1980s by Reuven Bar-On, an Israeli psychologist. In recent years several other theorists have proposed variations on the same idea.

- DeTimes

Definition:

ATTiTude is a complex mental state involving beliefs and feelings and values and dispositions to act in certain ways. It is the psychological result of perception and learning and reasoning. The perception of right or wrong / good or bad; depends on the person who perceives.

A Perfect definition of anything doesn't exist, because most things in life are subjective and there is no ideal.

Individual and Professional attitudes are linked obviously, because it is for the same MIND. Give it time, the reality shows up, and both individual and professional attitudes tend to be similar; since they are based on the same history of experiences and learning.

Happiness is an attitude. We either make ourselves miserable, or happy and strong. The amount of work is the same.

- DeTimes

Failure of Start-ups depends on various reasons.

1. The Idea: The foremost thing is the idea behind starting the venture. The foundation of this idea is of primary importance. If it not given a comprehensive thought and planning then it only sees the DOOM's DAY.

2. Execution of this plan: Execution is critical. If done well then one can sail through with little less money as well. However, this is where most start-ups have blown off.

3. Run-out of Money: It depends where the funding is coming from. Venture capitalists today are known to take more than a year to go through the analysis of profitability of an idea. At the same time they are looking at an investment period of a max. 4-5 years and expect aggressive profits. This is a situation that puts pressures on the very vision and forces the core team to look for short term gains. Consequence is, they lose long term vision and slip into drains. If the money is coming from conventional HNI investors, then they start looking for early results since there is no understanding of life cycle and the business both. The situation boils down to "You said, this would happen. So why has this not happened?" It generally comes within 3-4 months. Lack of patience and fading trust, stops the committed funds that were needed to survive.

4. Run-out of Commitment: Usually, markets don't perceive new players as genuine long term players because there is so much generalization. Thanks to a couple of bad experiences they have had, which paints everyone alike. It is thoroughly demotivating. Pressures mount up and investor mount up more pressures. This makes the Executives lose focus completely. So it looks like they have lost commitment. However, it is not the case many times. It is just that conducive environment for SUCCESS is snatched away.

5. Bad Management: Amateurs with lack of experience on planning both, actions and money, lose out in the race. They are most of the times at the losing end simply because they are too early in the business because of ROSY pictures painted in their minds. This is still better. Sometimes, certain managements of start-up companies have double standards. The idea shown is different from what they actually want to gain. It could be a short term loss making venture that is planned only for quick personal gains. This is worst.

6. Investors are those people who invest money for medium/long term gains. These gains have to be spread over time. Better the support system for any business, better it performs. But, it is strange for me to know that no one understands this when it comes to investing in new ventures. WHY do people not look at long term investment, when it comes to start-ups? All fortune companies were also start-ups when they began. It is only over a long period of time that they have become so BIG. People will easily play safe by investing money for 25 years in a Govt. company / Fortune company but not start-ups. There is lack of belief system. This is one of big reasons for dooming start-ups. A full fledged support system should be created to ensure success and over a longer time, not just 3-4 years. If the idea is right, SUCCESS is certain. Usually most ideas are good, if implemented properly and are need based. No doubt the risk is high, but gains are even higher.

7. Due to all the factors listed above and a few others, start-ups companies have a huge problem in attracting talent. So a big compromise needs to be made on this account. Also technology may be a cause of concern since it costs a lot of money and returns are not as quick as one would demand. So they are constrained by these and several other factors, to ensure FAILURE.

However, if a start-up company is provided with a long term support based on a clear thought, they will SUCCEED.

One can stop an invasion of armies, not an idea whose time has come.

  - DeTimes

S AT THE TOP

Notes: The payments are according to the 2005-06 annual report. The sales and profit growth figures are for 2006-07

-  DeTimes

The US constitution prevents Foreign-born people from running for the President's seat. But that doesn't stop them from running Fortune companies.

In a recent article in NY Times, it is reported that 15 CEOs of Fortune 100 companies were born outside of the U.S.

I have tried making a small list with as many names as I could quickly find. The only reason for this upsurge is growing globalization. Fortune companies have seen a rising trend in their overseas revenues. At the same time, there is a shortage of leadership skills, so the best bets are promoted irrespective of their location. So if someone from their Hong Kong office is doing a good job, it doesn't go unnoticed. The race for them is always on, towards the TOP job.

An example of this upsurge can be seen below:

1. Alcoa, American - Klaus Kleinfeld - German (earlier it was Belda, Moroccan)

2. Coca-Cola, American - Neville Isdell - Irish (studies in Brazil), Now has appointed Muhtar Kent (grew up in Turkey) to succeed Neville.

3. AIG, American - Martin Sullivan - British

4. PepsiCo, American - Indra Nooyi - Indian (born and educated in India)

5. Eli Lilly & Co, American - Sidney Taurel - Moroccan

6. Citigroup, American - Vikram Pandit - Indian

Ajay Banga is chairman and CEO of Global Consumer Group International and Deepak Sharma is CEO of Citi Global Wealth Management International. Vikram A. Atal is chairman and CEO of Citi Cards, Global Consumer Group, and Suneel Bakshi heads global commercial bank, Citi Markets and banking. Also, Sanjay Nayar is CEO, India. Almost completely run by Indians. It is not criminal to say that Citigroup is an Indian Company!

7. Hartford Financial Services, American - Ramani Ayer - Indian

8. American Express, American - Kenneth Chenault - Born in Long Island (African-American)

9. Altria Group, American - Louis C. Camilleri - Egyptian

10. Liberty Mutual Group, American - Edmund F. Kelly - Irish

11. Rohm & Haas - Rajiv L. Gupta - Indian

12. Sigma & Aldrich - Jai Nagarkatti - Indian (Fortune 1000)

13. LSI - Abhijit Y Talwalkar - Indian (Fortune 1000)

14. Tellabs - Krish A Prabhu - Indian (Fortune 1000)

15. Vodafone - Arun Sarin - Indian (Fortune 100)

16. Adobe Systems - Shantanu Narayen - Indian (Yet-to-be-assessed)

17. Arcelor-Mittal - L N Mittal - Indian

A new nine-nation opinion poll has found that an increasing number of Indians believe their nation will be a major global power by 2020, trumping even the US. 72 per cent said India would be a world power by 2020. The number of those pitching for the US and China dwindled to 59 per cent and 39 per cent respectively. This may be an over-estimation from your perspective but definitely not improbable.

Out of this small list of 17, more than half of them are Indians. We are certainly in the RECKONING....! Let's get our ACT together, we're the BEST. Together, we can make India, the #1 SUPER ECONOMY....!

Cheers!

-  DeTimes

I think many of us might have been in situations of " do or die" and/ or "never say die" in our life- say in our career, profession, management functions etc. What are your experiences? Can you share the same to enlighten one and all- as I do believe such a spirit in a person does mould his/her personality to be able to face all critical situations wisely (if lessons have been learnt) and boldly (if successful) in the times to follow! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is my take:

"Never say Die" keeps the world alive. I believe it is only this attitude that helps you follow your DREAMS and enable a GLOBAL CONSPIRACY to achieve them.

Apart from them, this attitude has helped me wisely manage crisis, and emerge out of it and become successful. DREAMERS would understand that, it is only this attitude that helped many achieve their DREAMS.

I went through a massive financial crisis a few years ago. I had to take steps to face it and emerge out of it as a winner. I took radical steps without the fear of outcome and have reached where I am today. It is the most important factor, that contributes to one's growth and success.

If you don't have this attitude, you won't grow as an individual. You will remain as a follower. It is this attitude that makes you a leader in what you can do best.

Most freedom wars are won based on this factor. Most businesses have become successful only due to this. Most businesses have seen crisis and emerged winners only because of this attitude. If you have this attitude, I strongly believe, you can face any circumstance in life and emerge as a winner. Only THIS attitude can show you daylight sooner after dark.

However, if you give up, you stagnate, right where you give up. One doesn't evolve without this attitude. Remember, it's right said, "It's the ATTITUDE that take you to the ALTITUDE."
- DeTimes

Excellence begins when we know that being good or even competent won't carry the day, when doing more or trying harder won't bridge the gap, when excellence is simply the only alternative.

All of us have had moments when we succeed seemingly without effort, times when we perform superbly and gracefully, times when we hit the mark. Yet we are never quite sure how it all came together, how it happened, or if we can make it happen again.

Excellence is not a matter of ability, knowledge or practice. It cannot be taught, imposed, or wished into existence. Excellence is a matter of the stand we are and the stand we take—a stand that allows for performance that surpasses what was previously possible, performance that defies old limits and maps new territory.

Excellence is shown by people who keep moving and extending the boundaries of what they know is possible, people who generate a stand to bring to bear what is missing, people who come through time after time.

Here is a list of eight rare combination of abilities and traits found in people who excel:

1. Preparation: academic and professional.

2. Character: values, ethics, beliefs, purpose, mission, integrity, walk the talk.

3. Principles: big message, point of view, tenets, main points.

4. Personality: charisma, style, originality, authenticity, one of a kind.

5. Performance: inspiring action, real-world performance, work ethic.

6. Experience: beyond local and regional, more national and international.

7. Expression: substance and style in writing, speaking, coaching, consulting, mentoring, training, or teaching.

8. Influence: difference, results, change, transformation.

Hence, it’s the quality of being exceptionally good of its kind. A special quality that confers to Superiority. The value of brains is more than just... the brains.

And yes, it’s truly a JOURNEY of a lifetime not a ONE TIME thing...

- DeTimes