When was the last time you got burned?

In medical terms, when you get burned there is a destructive process that is initiated in which tissues (eg skin) are destroyed and continue to be damaged until the burning process is counteracted/stopped. In basic first aid training they teach you the importance of putting something cold on a burn to stop the burning process.

Something similar happens, metaphorically, when our reputation takes a hit. At those times you are faced with a choice, push back with reality to “stop the burn,” or allow wrong perception to persist along with its damaging effects.

A General Sales Manager relayed the following story to me that gives insight into this concept: 

A customer won a new vehicle from a local casino and came to the dealership to take delivery. In the process of doing paperwork the fleet manager, who did the entire transaction A-Z, disclosed that the odometer showed 371 miles. 

Upon seeing the odometer disclosure the customer stated, “This is bait and switch. I won a new vehicle and you’re trying to give me a used vehicle?!”

The finance manager assured the customer that this was a new vehicle and explained that the dealership had located and traded for the vehicle in order to meet the casino’s specifications in the give-away—the miles were the result of transportation from the other dealer. However, and to appease the upset customer he looked through his inventory and found a similar vehicle, with only 7 miles, albeit with tinted windows. The customer chose the second vehicle and paid the difference for the tinted windows.

During the delivery process the fleet manager explained the satisfaction survey process and asked if there was anything that would keep the customer from giving the store a perfect survey. The customer said that he knew how the survey process worked and not to worry.

To the fleet manager’s chagrin the survey came back with a score of 3.5/5 and included a comment about his “bait and switch” experience.

The fleet manager was upset, said he felt burned, and asked what he could have done different.

After investigating the entire transaction further, including calling the customer to ensure I understood the situation, I shared with the fleet manager the concept of “stopping the burn”.

We have all heard that perception is reality. And, as you know, the perception of most people is that car dealers lie, steal, and cheat. Hence, when they come to a dealership these people are suspicious, defensive, and cautious. We need to be mindful that we are not starting the relationship from a neutral position, but rather in the negative, and need to be extra sensitive to comments and/or behaviors (ours and theirs) that reveal and reinforce a false perception.

So, when the customer suggested that the fleet manager was doing the old bait and switch routine the customer was in effect inflicting a burn on the fleet manager’s dignity and character. And, because the fleet manager did not stand his ground and take offense to the false statement [stopping the burn] he was in effect admitting guilt by default. Like it or not that is the psychology of the matter. It was not surprising then that the burn continued all the way through to the survey.

This is a really important point. If we have good character and don’t lie, steal, and cheat, we should not brush past or smooth over offensive comments that attack our character. To not address these offensive comments reinforces a false perception and that becomes the other person’s reality.

The good news is that we are all endowed with brains that feel or sense when an offense has taken place, no matter how subtle it is. It is incumbent upon you to stop the burn by confidently and tactfully standing your ground and counteracting a burn on your character. Otherwise, this false perception will extend to your public reputation through negative word of mouth, negative reviews, and ‘bad’ surveys beyond the sale itself.

I am convinced that good people who are true to themselves and confidently stand their ground by defending their character will not only gain greater respect immediately (leading to more sales), but enjoy stronger customer relationships, benefit from greater advocacy, receive higher scores on surveys and avoid getting burned.

Go ahead, test my theory, although in your “gut” (limbic brain) you know that I am right.

Herb Mast is a Leadership Coach and Employee Engagement Specialist. Learn how he can assist you in implementing the principles and concepts presented here.

When asked what they believe the definition of integrity is, most people say something like: being honest…doing the right thing…acting in the same manner when somebody is not watching as when they are.

While these are all elements of integrity I believe a better working definition is needed so that leaders can more intentionally operate with integrity.

A dictionary definition for integrity is the quality or state of wholeness, congruence, alignment. In other words, integrity requires completeness, consistency, and direction—but relative to what?

To demonstrate my point I often ask people if a thief can have integrity. This usually elicits a long pause during which I suggest that a thief has integrity when they are stealing. In the same way a liar has integrity when they are lying. In other words, when somebody is being true to who they are they are operating with integrity. 

So, integrity needs to be evaluated relative to a standard. This is why I struggle when somebody talks about integrity without stating a standard against which actions and behaviors are compared. 

On its own, without stating a standard, it is meaningless to suggest integrity as a guiding principle or core value. An organization might as well talk about baseball, mom, and apple pie—things that are meaningful to many Americans, but not all and certainly not all humans—than to site integrity without a defining standard.

I suggest that the mission of the organization is that standard and that the following model depicts what operating with integrity looks like:

Great leaders provide their team with inspiration, purpose, and alignment by defining the following three elements:

• Vision: Why do we exist as an organization? (destination)
• Mission: What drives our day-by-day efforts? (journey)
• Values: Which behaviors do we consider central to our brand and differentiate us as an organization?

Further, to operate with integrity a leader must ask:

• How clearly is the mission understood by the team? (Congruence—Consistency)
• How completely is it embraced? (Wholeness—Completeness)
• How consistently is it being executed? (Alignment—Direction)

Recommended reading:

Integrity: The Courage to Meet the Demands of Reality 

Dr. Henry Cloud: There are three essentials for success. The first two, craft or skill competencies and relationship building skills, are common knowledge; smart, talented people are a dime a dozen. What makes the difference is having the character not to screw it up. How many times have you seen someone whose personhood got in the way of their success? 

Herb Mast is a Leadership Coach and Employee Engagement Specialist. Learn how he can assist you in implementing the principles and concepts presented here.

I have often heard that longevity in the car business is directly proportional to production divided by toxicity. In layman’s terms this suggests that as long as you produce you will be tolerated. 

What a sad and shortsighted mindset. 

The only world in which this may work is a world where employee engagement and customer retention aren’t important. Otherwise, no amount of individual production is sufficient to outweigh the detrimental impact toxic people have on others. 

Then why are toxic people tolerated?

Aside from the reality that most people [are wusses who] try to avoid conflict, I think the metaphor of an iceberg gives insight. Even toxic people have some redeeming qualities, although usually only short term, which represent the part of the iceberg above the water line. These redeeming qualities are highly desirable (especially when in the form of production) albeit deceptive as managers hope to get them without the downside. Unfortunately, the toxic part, often subtle and unseen [below the water line] causes much greater damage. 

Smart people learn from their own experiences, while wise people learn from the experiences of others. We simply need to trust that coming in contact with an iceberg [toxic people] will never end well and instead we must steer clear. 

Unfortunately, too many managers take a short-term approach in tolerating toxic producers—believing they can play with fire without getting burned—largely due to the way their own pay plans are structured. The allure of toxic producers is often too strong, just like the allure of unearned windfall gains. 

That is why leaders define [and maintain] guiding principles for their organizations—principles that are not to be compromised—to help managers make better choices with day-to-day behaviors that are toxic. Further, great leaders are courageous in not hiring potentially toxic people and in dealing with toxic habits when observed. 

The next time you consider tolerating a toxic person ask yourself how long you would tolerate a diffuser in the middle of the room filled with poison. Rather, eliminate the poisons and fill your diffusers with positivity and watch your team flourish.

Herb Mast is a Leadership Coach and Employee Engagement Specialist. Learn how he can assist you in implementing the principles and concepts presented here.

For leaders speaking candidly is essential to maintaining a high level of personal energy.  For teams speaking candidly is essential to seeing reality more clearly.

According to the Conscious Leadership Group, research reveals that 97% of people admit to outright lying.

Speaking candidly, however, is not just about telling the truth (getting facts straight), although that is a very important component, it’s also about revealing, and not concealing, thoughts, feelings, and sensations.

In order for a leader and a team to see things clearly it is important that everybody speaks candidly with each other. The reality, however, is that most people only practice selective candor—they withhold or conceal—usually out of fear. Unfortunately, withholding typically leads to individuals withdrawing and ultimately projecting and teams not tapping into the strengths and energy of team members.

In healthy organizations leaders speak candidly and reveal their thoughts (head), feelings (heart), and sensations (gut). Through candid conversations everybody becomes more aware, inaccurate perceptions are clarified, and the team sees reality more clearly—leading to better decision-making, more cohesive teams, and higher energy/engagement of the individuals.

Steps to becoming a more candid organization:

• Agree as a team that everybody will speak candidly with each other without defensiveness, judgment, or retaliation. Unless everybody on the team is committed to candor the team runs the risk of getting hurt, being rejected and misunderstood. It is also important that the main leader goes first and demonstrates candor so that others will feel safe in doing the same.
• Speak unarguably with truthfulness, openness, and awareness. Arguable statements suggest something is true or right (e.g. “The new sales manager is not the right person for our organization.”), while unarguable statements are framed in the form of thoughts, feelings, and sensations (e.g. “I fear that the new sales manager may not be aligned with the values of our organization. Each time we talk about his plan I get a queasy feeling in my stomach and I feel he is withholding important details.”)
• Practice deep listening: With your head to the words used, with your heart to the emotions expressed, and with your gut to identify core needs.

For more insights into the powerful practice of speaking candidly click these links:

Herb Mast is a Leadership Coach and Employee Engagement Specialist. Learn how he can assist you in implementing the principles and concepts presented here.