Category Archives: Training

#64 “Mystery shopper”

Leave a reply
Send to Kindle

The “Mystery shopper” concept is very valuable in marketing. It is useful to measure how your organization is doing in external facing activities. You can learn how your sales force engages leads (or not), how customer service creates up sell and cross sell opportunities (or not), and how your vendors are representing your company in the marketplace (or not).

Now extend the concept to the workplace where you are working on your leadership skills. It is unnerving to wonder if you are speaking to a “Mystery shopper” and you don’t know it. But this should not be a surprise. You are under constant scrutiny, whether you know it or not, whether you like it or not.

Then why do you or your co-worker behave as if no one is watching? Reckless and insensitive behavior in the workplace will come down if you develop higher self-awareness and self-control. Even if it is developed out of fear and anxiety caused by a “Mystery shopper.” Over time it will become a way of life and a core part of your personality.

For kids, the “Mystery shopper” is Santa Claus. They are warned that “Santa is watching” and the quantity and size of Christmas gifts depend on whether they were naughty or nice. This is convenient, but poor training. Once the kids grow up and learn there is no Santa Claus, once they earn an income so they can buy whatever they want, whenever they want, the desire to be “nice” is no longer “inside out.” This may explain why extrinsic rewards do not always drive long term behavior changes in a sustainable way.

Share

#58 Sniff test for assessing leadership readiness

Leave a reply
Send to Kindle

How do you select a candidate for leadership positions? There are ways to measure it using surveys, 360 degree feedback, and of course, the gut.

Here are two ways to determine a person’s natural readiness:

  • Does he or she require supervision? Or does he or she work independently? If the latter, then it is more likely they are ready for higher positions.
  • What is the quality of the output? Are there are lot of defects, and is re-work required? Unless the tasks are clearly R&D or “experimentation,” this is a bad sign.

Someone who requires low supervision and produces good quality work will have the strong foundation (self confidence, track record, credibility) required for higher responsibilities. The next thing to check is:

  • “Fire” or “desire” or “ambition.” This shows the intrinsic motivation of the individual and will reveal potential. Do they have a burning desire to achieve? Or to go to the next level? If you invest in someone who does not have intrinsic motivation, you will be throwing good money after bad.

By all means collect data using formal methods. It does not hurt to validate hypothesis, and look for consistencies in multiple points of view (or lack thereof).

Share