Employability and Misuse of Power Monday, Aug 27 2007

Michael Vick. Alberto Gonzales. Two drastically different people. Two high-profile individuals. Same gender but different ethnicities. Several things in common.

Both held press conferences this morning and made public statements about their professional actions that have come under scrutiny. Neither lingered to answer questions from the press. One resigned from office; the other anticipates that his career is essentially over.

But there, the similarities end. One announced he has found God. (Move over Paris Hilton!) One averred that he takes complete responsibility for his lack of discretion and needs to be more responsible, especially as a role model for young people. The other took no responsibility for the violations of which he is accused. One spoke of self-introspection and reflection indicating a need to discern where his errors in judgment occurred and why. Contrition was the tone in his voice. The other had no contemplation of such an endeavor. Bitterness was the tone in his voice. One acknowledged his position as a role model for youth who will be our future foundations of business and industry.

There was a third party in this morning’s press conference drama. That press conference bore many similarities to the first two. It was conducted by a high-profile personality who is male and is of yet another ethnicity. (It seems diversity was an underlying standard.) President Bush (the younger) had words to say about the resignation of his Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales. Bush’s voice held agitated bitterness. He expressed resentment that his chosen one had endured such difficulties and questions of how he conducted himself in his role. He seemed to imply that both he and Gonzales are above scrutiny and answer only to theirselves — not to their employers. Bush also declined to wait for or answer questions from The Press.

Neither Bush nor Gonzales see theirselves as potential role models. Neither feels the term “accountability” applies to them.

Sports pundits project that Michael Vick will be out of sports for a time but will probably do a short stint in jail. They feel his sports career is not over. Indeed, the Falcons have chosen not to fire him but have put him on indefinite leave. The thing of it is, Vick can afford a protracted leave given his position and the millions of dollars salary he commanded. Provided he stays in condition by exercising and practicing in some manner during whatever length of leave he must serve, Vick will be able to return to the gridiron a little older, a lot wiser (if he is sincere with his spontaneous expressions of this morning), and ready to do a better job of managing his life.

With regard to Vick, it sounded as though he had several long conversations this weekend with several people who have a lot of influence over his life. Their counsel was obvious in the choice of words and phrases that emanated from the young man. A father’s voice could be heard. A coach’s utterances could be deciphered. A religious leader’s counsel could be discerned. And the judgment of a lawyer was also laced through his statement. It is obvious that he listened. Unlike Michael Tyson, Vick understood the essence of the advice from all. The apology was not empty. But the cynic inside of us wonders whether this statement (made minutes or hours before appearing in court today) were designed to gain a more lenient sentence in December. There is a sufficient span of time for that speculation to be sorted out.

Of more importance are the statements and lack of contrition, lack of self awareness, of Gonzales and Bush. No doubt Gonzales will be able to find another law firm where he can practice. But he will not be snatched up as quickly as he would like and he will have too much time to reflect on his actions. He will have time to rue the re-actions to his acts not only during his two and a half year tenure but the years of his association with President Bush (the younger).

Bush faces a similar time of introspection and reflection. Given the personality we’re dealing with, the consummate refusal to hold himself accountable to anyone, it seems his lessons will not be learned in even this lifetime. Again, given his position and pedigree, Bush will have no concerns about his retirement years.

But this leads to the next consideration. Although there are some who will probably be willing to take Gonzales as “of counsel,” how long will it take for him to become among the employed once again. And with regard to Bush, will he spend the remainder of his life as a retiree or will he have any type of career left?

Let me turn these last thoughts over to you. Would you hire any of these three men? If so, which one(s)? and If so, for what type of role in your organization?

ethics, accountability, self awareness, responsibility, discretion, power,

Need employment screening? Get a 20% discount on your first order!

One Response »

 

Who Decides What’s News? Saturday, Jul 14 2007

It was two years ago on August 7 that we learned of Peter Jenning’s death. For me, it was a major blow (but not as big as the one that would hit that coming December). This man, journalism public figure, model, was one of my news reporter ideals. His cutting edge work throughout the decades put the issues in front of us and made us think about what they meant. Then he allowed us to put the pieces together for ourselves. He covered the news in the remote areas of the world. He covered the schisms of our social fabric and the tragedies compounded by tragedies.

Jennings was the ABC World News Tonight anchor. But on his death, he was remembered by the media, on rivals CNN, CBS, in Newsweek, and on the BBC, to name a few.

Hearing of his death and short-lived illness on the night of August 7, that I was struck motionless. As the special announcement played out the milestones of the icon’s life, the reasons why it was such a blow became increasingly apparent. It was reporters like Jennings who served as the models of my inquisitiveness, stabs at journalistic integrity, and an insistence on looking at the world and the meaningful issues rather than the tried and trite.

The final blow was learning that Jennings was born on July 29. No wonder! I thought as the pieces fell together. No wonder there are so many similarities, so many common roads and endeavors, the same fire.

So in reviewing Jenning’s life, and the other hallmarks who are, or were, models for me, the question begs asking. In media, who is it who decides what the news is? Is it the Managing Editor, the publisher, the advertisers, or the public? Who decides what is newsworthy and how long is it newsworthy?

In asking these questions, the events surrounding the Paris Hilton detention become striking. The fallout of poor little rich girl having to stay in that horrid jail with all of those jail people. Not able to use nail polish remover. Having to endure a constantly buring overhead light and an unsheathed toilet. House arrest in her 4,000 square foot house would have been much more civilized. But where would the time for contrition and genuine remorse have emerged?

For two weeks, we endured the Paris Hilton comedy as she used the legal system to do whatever she wanted, all the way up to determining that the last court hearing should be done via teleconference. She even doctored up her release after serving a scant two and a half days in jail. And all of this was news — matters of importance to the general public for the sake of their betterment and social welfare.

But the pivotal question looms before us as the Paris falling action subsides. Delgadillo, his governance, and his family have suffered some interesing public revelation while sweet Paris (who he prosecuted to the fullest for serving her full time) sat quietly in her confines. Who determines what is news and how long is it newsworthy?

Perhaps the answer to the questions were answered on June 26 during the Los Angeles County Supervisors Hearing. The area behind (and also in front of) the plexiglass was filled to overflowing with all manner of media. One of the reasons for their presence was the Supervisors’ deliberations concerning closure of the King-Drew Hospital. Another had to do with Sheriff Baca’s handling of the Paris Hilton incarceration.

Cameras were poised. Microphones were wrapped and held to just the right position. Notepads and pens were held at the ready and hasty notes were made about the proceedings. Sheriff Baca entered the auditorium and cameras panned then returned to the focus on the Supervisors and their witnesses.

After a time of sitting in the auditorium, The Sheriff left the room. The media quietly filed out behind him as public testimony regarding the closure of King-Drew Hospital was being offered. A ripple of amazement was quieted in short order as Supervisor Yaroslavsky announced, “Now you see who ranks as far as news coverage. Paris Hilton is being released from jail and the media need to cover that.” The audience was assured that there would be a one or two minute break while the media filed out and the hearings could then resume.

NOTE: Baca’s stress and strain showed through his need to acknowledge each and every person he passed as he made his way to a seat in the auditorium. His condition became acutely obvious as I left the Hall. I doubt that he recognized or even remembered me from the past, yet he had gracious acknowledgements for me. His voice was strained. His eyes seemed to look at the person but they merely saw an image before him as the two attendants ushered him back into the auditorium. He seemed like a person going before a firing squad.

What is newsworthy? Who determines what captures the intellect and attention of the public? That moment in the Board of Supervisors auditorium seemed to answer the questions. The most important issue of the day was the poor little rich girl who gets whatever she wants. The general public’s consciousness and urging toward critical thinking about meaningful issues that affect local as well as global welfare gave sway to whether Paris Hilton lived in a jail cell or walked out of a detention facility.

I look forward to those who follow in Jennings’ footsteps. I crave the days of consuming the news for the value of the information it provides and its informativeness. I yearn for the questions the media will force me to ask and spur me to research. Meanwhile, we have a duty to ourselves and our information driven needs to demand that we receive true news that is full of the information. And we also need to demand that the answers not be spoon fed to us — as though media has the right opinion and is telling us what to think. We need to demand that the facts be laid out in a clear and unbiased manner and allow us to draw our own conclusions.

Who makes the decisions? Those who cause the news wires to survive with our consuming dollars because we who watch the news also drive what is considered “news.”

Leave a Response »

 

Shakespearean Plays Wednesday, Jul 11 2007

Any of you enjoy The Theatre? I know I do. Shakespeare is touted as the master. Yes, he captures the attention and holds it. But as I moved through seeing or reading his plays, whether drama, comedy, or tragedy, there is one thing they all have in common. It’s the same story line. There is the villain (what good story doesn’t have someone to hate?). There is the hero and the heroine who get totally confused and blomoxed by the villain’s machinations. There are the hapless and the stalwart colleagues who move the hero/heroine pawns along on their path to the outcome. And the audience becomes rapt in the horridness of the villain but ever clinging to (usually) him to see what will happen next, how he will wrap the thread of intrigue even tighter about the H&H’s necks.

After a while, it becomes obvious that all of the characters are the puppets of the villain. Even the audience gets threaded into the fabric of the play because they simply cannot tear themselves away. They stay riveted to their seats. They cringe with ire; they hold their breath with anticipation. No matter what, they keep watching and urge others to watch with them. The audience grows.

We’re approaching Fall recruiting conference time. There are some venues that will do what they can to draw attendees based on the high quality information and presenters they will have at their venue. They boast of the great connections you’ll be able to make by coming to their conference and expo.

There are other venues that have been attempting the Shakespearean approach to attracting attendees with a touch of the traditional thrown in for good measure so that the tactic doesn’t blare like a police interrogation room lamp. There’s the ill informed who spouts off all of the time on every subject and rankles the sensibilities of everyone who passes by the name. How they would love to avoid this person. But like the villain in the plays, the person cannot be ignored. There’s just one more look at what they’ve said just to see, perhaps, if they’ve said something that actually makes sense or whether they’ve been consistent and ethical in their stance. There’s the desire to see whether something is said that is not self-effacing in some way.

This latter tactic works. Who says we have to offer quality anything when there’s this Shakespearean play running in the background all of the time. It draws good site traffic. And when conference time comes along, it’s worth it to attend just to see whether all of the players are there and what sort of drama they’ll provide during conference — live and in person.

The trouble is, these are such cheap shots that they should be seen for what they are by the average anyone. The trouble is, they are seen for what they are, even if it is a subconscious recognition. But the purported minor characters are there to spur the action and draw the audience back into the machinations of the play. The arguments are fueled by the ragings and bombastic logic spouted by the minor characters (don’t let their positions fool you; they’re in no way minor characters). And there’s just enough logic that you nod your head and say “Yes, that’s right,” as the conversations and arguments evolve.

These dramas happen in many milleu — the family, workplace, clubs and organizations, online communities. Good leadership will nip it in the bud lest the bile overflows and poisons the environment, turning one upon the other where there could be cooperation and growth. Good leadership will let everyone in on the fact that it’s simply pretend play. Good leadership will not savor the growth and the price that’s paid for it. Strong leadership takes subsuming other things that we think are important in deference to the health of the whole.

Step back for a moment. Ask yourself why are these conversations and arguments happening? If they’re running against the grain of what the site rules discourage, why do these things occur? And if it’s the same, or nearly, characters in nearly every situation, why are they allowed this continuous role? Someone is gaining a tremendous benefit from these dramatizations. And in that case, check the backs of your hands, top of your head, and so on. There may be some strings attached to them. In fact, you just may be one of the puppet characters being manipulated by the play’s villain.

Need some scissors?

Leave a Response »