Category Archives: leadership

Grandville Mayor Jim Buck announces retirement

Posted on by

Since the name of this blog is “Communities Count” I thought I would take the liberty of using this particular space to opine about the announcement that Grandville Mayor Jim Buck will be retiring at the end of his current term.

I have worked for the MML for over 8 years now and as President of the MML Foundation for the past four.  During this time I have come to know Mayor Buck in his role as Chair of our foundation board and I can say without hesitation that I consider him not only as a colleague and a friend but a mentor as well.  Over the course of his career, Mayor Buck has continually displayed the attributes of a what it means to be a public servant and to understand why communities count.

During his 29 years as mayor Jim has led the Grandville community through considerable change, including significant population growth, numerous park improvements, the Chicago Drive streetscape and large scale commercial development of the Rivertown Parkway corridor, including Rivertown Crossings Mall and the current CWD development. Throughout all of these changes, Mayor Buck’s primary focus was ensuring a high quality of life for Grandville residents.

And Jim has been an ardent supporter of not only Grandville, but for communities across our state and the MML.  In 2012, he was the recipient of one of the League’s highest honors – the Jim Sinclair Exceptional Service Award (view a press release about this honor). He is past chairman of the Michigan Municipal League Workers’ Compensation Fund, and former League board member. He also served on the Michigan Association of Mayors board for four years and was awarded an Michigan Municipal League’s Honorary Life Membership in 1998.

In a press release about his announcement, Buck stated, “I look back over the past 42 years with a lot of positive thoughts and a feeling of some major accomplishments.”  Jim, you have set a standard for future leaders of not only Grandville but for elected officials of all stripes to follow.  Somehow saying thank you for your service just doesn’t seem enough.  I look forward to continued work with you through our Foundation.

Can negative feedback be positive?

Posted on by

This Blog Post by Heidi Grant Halvorson  is worth checking out, as it debunks the notion that we should only give positive feedback. There is a classic scene in the movie “Meet the Fockers.”  In the movie, the lead character’s (Greg) father-in-law is stunned to find out that they make 9th place ribbons. He makes this discovery while perusing a shrine to Greg still maintained by Greg’s parents that feature a number of the mementos to mediocrity. I think it rather brilliantly illustrates the idea we should only encourage and never criticize. Criticism though is an important and necessary component of staff development, and understanding when to use each is important.

So what purpose does positive and negative feedback serve?  Positive feedback does help to increase staff commitment by enhancing their experience and boosting their confidence. Negative feedback is more explanatory as it provides feedback on where staff needs to spend place additional effort, as well as offering insight into how they might improve.

With that understanding, you can see that positive and negative feedback each serve a purpose. For an inexperienced staff member, positive feedback may help them to stay optimistic and comfortable given the challenges they are facing.  This added encouragement is something novices tend to need more than the seasoned pro. When you are dealing with an expert, and they essentially are looking for those opportunities for incremental improvement, it’s negative feedback or criticism that will help them achieve at the next level.

Keep this lesson in mind when trying to develop staff.  This isn’t second grade soccer, so we don’t have to hand out 9th place ribbons.  Negative feedback may be exactly what certain members of your team need to be on top of their game.

Well I’m glad that’s over!

Posted on by

Well It’s finally over.  As of this morning we do not have to watch an endless stream of political ads that tell me yes means no and which candidate is the only real American.   My Facebook friends will no longer have to share their political wisdom and personal beliefs, and my twitter feed won’t be filled with “he said, she said” tweets.  I welcome back with open arms commercials to grow hair and lose weight.  I am excited to see pictures of my friends dog wearing a tuxedo and tweets about how amazing the new IPad and how it will change my life.  Yep life is back to normal.

Unfortunately we are still left with a polarized political system.  Normal also means far too many of our elected officials are guided by views at the far ends of the spectrum, and somehow compromise has become a four letter word.  The challenges that remain are significant. I implore my friends on both sides of the aisle to work together to make Michigan and the United States the best they can be.  It is in everyone’s best interests to find common ground and develop sound public and fiscal policy that moves us forward.  The alternative is unacceptable.

With Liberty and Justice for All

Posted on by

The American model of democracy is the envy of the entire world.  One person, one vote, the pursuit of happiness, free speech, you know that sort of thing.  Here we have the chance to vote on issues that matter without fear that money or greed would influence our system, we can always rely on truthful information from all sides and gold at the end of every rainbow.

Well at least we have some of those things.

With the election rapidly approaching, I feel compelled to weigh in on Proposals 5 and 6. In my view, the impact of a yes vote would be devastating.   In case you have elected, no pun intended, to tune out to the messaging surrounding the proposals let me give a quick overview.  Proposal 5 would permit a minority in the legislature to prevent any change in taxes no matter the need or reason.  Proposal 6 would ensure that the only viable international trade crossing between Southeast Michigan and Canada is privately controlled held by a single individual.  Frankly one needs only follow the money to figure out who benefits and who doesn’t.

Proposal 5 is simply put the let minority rule proposal.  It boils down to this, even if 135 members of the Legislature voted in favor of closing a tax loophole, ending a special interest tax break, or raising or lowering a tax, just 13 senators could block it.  How hard do you think it would be for a billionaire to control the votes of just 13 state senators?  Sadly not very.  Imagine the power well funded special interests could wield if just 13 legislators could block a policy supported by the other 135 members of the House and Senate.  Scary stuff!  Not exactly what the founding fathers had in mind.

Proposal 6 seems so simple, let the “people” decide.  In reality this is the billionaire full employment act or the international free trade restriction proposal. The “people” in this case are a single family that have made a fortune controlling this international crossing. In a post 911 world, how can we rely on the whims of a single family to manage this critical trade route, which by the way was built 83 years ago?  More importantly the economic impact that would be provided by an additional crossing would be extraordinarily positive for southeast Michigan, just not for the ruling monarchy.  This region stands to benefit greatly from expanded import/export capacity in the form of jobs and investment.  There is only one beneficiary from not building an additional crossing, and it’s not you.

I think the choice is abundantly clear.  VOTE NO on Proposals 5 & 6

 

Fish can’t climb trees!

Posted on by

So if you’re like me, half your friends on Facebook post uplifting pics, sarcastic pics, stupid pics, people I would like to punch in the throat pics (okay I do like that one).  Most of the time I either ignore, chuckle, or shake my head as appropriate and move on to bigger and better things.  This one however resonated with me.

“Everybody is a genius, but if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid”  This made me wonder to myself, how many tree climbing fish do I know?  Or more importantly, how many fish am I trying to get to climb a tree?

How much energy might we be wasting trying to get conformity, or trying to get people to do something they are not wired to do?  The answer to that question might be scary.  Are the right people not on the bus, or are we putting them in the wrong seats?  As leaders we need to leverage our resources to maximize our output.  That is not going to be achieved with an extensive tree climbing training program for our fish, and I certainly don’t want to be judged by my ability to teach fish to climb.

Now if there isn’t a roll for fish in our organization, that is a different problem.  But we need to let the monkeys climb and let the fish swim. In other words, let people do what they do best. Leverage their skill sets to your mutual advantage. I regularly see marketing people struggle to produce a spreadsheet, and it falls short of the mark anyway.  If they had asked anyone in the finance department it would have been done in minutes, and done better.  Conversely, I can try and make an accountant artistic, or maybe I could let them do accounting.   Different skill sets, different roles perhaps?

Justin Verlander isn’t judged by his ability to play shortstop or hit a ball.  Barry Sanders wasn’t kept out of the hall of fame because he never kicked a field goal.  Are we judging our fish on their tree climbing?  I think that Big Al might be on to something.

 

Get by with a little help from your friends

Posted on by

I applaud the City of Detroit and the State of Michigan for making everyone a winner with the Belle Isle lease agreement.  The deal for the state to lease Belle Isle relieves the city of the substantial cost of maintaining the park, and opens the door for significant improvements to this tarnished gem making it an even greater asset to the city.  Residents and visitors to Detroit alike should be thrilled with this announcement as everyone stands to benefit.  So what lessons can we all take a way from this historic agreement?

Lesson one:  Put your good sense ahead of your pride.  It sounds easy, but that can be tough to do and takes a fair amount of courage.  This decision was not a slam dunk.  Not because it didn’t make sense, but because many felt that if the city doesn’t directly manage the park, then it must be a loss for the city. It wouldn’t have been a loss of money, improvements or access, those all improve.  None of that made the decision any less difficult.  Fortunately all involved had the vision to see that allowing the state to be a partner with the city improves Belle Isle for everyone.

Lesson two: Do what you do best.  Belle Isle is a major park that requires a huge continuing investment. Even though it is utilized by many folks outside the city, Detroit bore the full financial burden. In short Detroit was not set up to succeed on this one. The State has more resources, manages large parks, and is actually pretty good at it. The city is far better served by focusing their energy and financial wherewithal on other areas of the city’s operation. They can now put added emphasis on neighborhood parks, public safety or other key areas.

Lesson three:  The Stockdale paradox – Confront the brutal truth of the situation, yet at the same time never give up hope.  Like so many municipalities in Michigan, the City of Detroit is faced with some very difficult financial circumstances.  It serves no one’s purposes, especially your residents, to ignore the reality that we all face.  Confront it and utilize all the resources at your disposal to craft a plan that keeps your community moving forward.

My father always told me, “don’t cut off your nose to spite your face”, and it seems appropriate in this circumstance.  To have let this opportunity pass would have served no one.  We should all learn from the leadership shown here to be open to new ideas, even if that idea stings a little at first.  Maybe that idea is in the form of a partnership, or even a hand off.  If in the end our residents are better served, then we have done our job. Kudos all around!

The Big Disconnect

Posted on by

Once upon a time in a land far, far, away….Oh wait wrong fairly tale.  What am I talking about? The fact that not too long ago the provision ofr services in Michigan used to be a shared responsibility between state government and local government.  But, over the past decade or more what we have seen is a devolving of those responsibilities to primarily locals as the state has used nearly $5 billion meant for locals to fill its own budget hole.  As a result we’ve seen locals layoff police and fire personnel, close parks and libraries, and put off much need upgrades to important infrastructure such as local streets and sewers. At the same time, getting state government (governors and legislators) to come together on the need for additional revenues has been virtually impossible.  Take additional revenues to help fix our roads and bridges and support transit alternatives.  Even with federal dollars at stake, the legislature can’t seem to find a way to agree to something…anything that would bring such areas into the 21st century.

And yet, at the local level, residents are passing millage after millage to support any number of services.  As a matter of fact at the August election, 90% of all local millages were approved.  This included 100% of all public transit millage requests!   The story has been the same the past couple of years. In the August 2010 election, 86% of all millages were approved and in May of 2011 more than 80% were adopted.

So what’s the deal in the halls of Lansing or Washington?   Clearly, local voters are more than willing to support additional revenues for items when the case is made for specific services that add to our quality of life.  Lets just be sure that the next time we hear a state legislator say the public is against raising taxes to remind them of the reality.

Can you afford to cut training from your budget?

Posted on by

An all too frequent casualty of tightening budgets are the dollars spent on training.  It seems painless.  There is no immediate manifestation of a service cut, or elimination of a position so it on a relative basis it seems like a good cut to make.  But what is the cost of what you don’t know?  What is the impact of not being aware of innovations that would provide more efficient operations and lessen the budget constraints?  I would suggest that these costs far outweigh the cost of the training.

We are all being asked to do more with less, or as I have heard some folks express recently, to do something with nothing.  How does anyone expect to succeed in this environment without providing themselves the opportunity to train and network with their peers? Elected and appointed officials are tasked with running very complex, multifaceted corporations.  In the case of  elected officials, most begin office with a love for their community but little to no training or experience about the role they are accepting.  That is not a formula for efficiency and innovation, it’s a formula for disaster.

Every successful business understands the fundamental need to train their employees,   but we somehow diminish that same value when it comes to our local operations.  Training and networking are not perks , they are a necessary part of any successful business.  Don’t short change your community by taking a short term solution to a long term problem.  You have a duty to take the necessary steps to be certain you are in a position to succeed. A big part of that is sowing the seeds of innovation and efficiency with appropriate educational and networking opportunities.

Imagine if your community never learned about computers, the internet, or email.  Think about the cost it would take to deliver services without the benefit of these innovations.  Are you up to speed on grants? Economic development laws and practices?  Service delivery models?  Laws pertaining to setting rates and charges?

What’s the future cost of what you don’t know about today?  It might shock you!

Communication Breakdown

Posted on by

I was reading a great post about communication the other day that really resonated with me.  The focus of it centered around the importance of intimacy. No, not that intimacy, that’s a different blog.  It was on the importance of intimacy as it relates to communication.  In short, the greater the distance between leaders and workers, the less likely you are to be aware of new ideas or problems on the front line.  It’s too easy to pull together a big group and declare victory as it relates to your internal communications.  If you are viewed as the person in the ivory tower,with the possible exception of your inner circle,  you can’t expect anyone to give it to you straight.  To be effective, communications need to be more personal and sincere.

They describe four techniques to help have more meaningful conversations:

1. To learn more, listen better.

2. To have a big impact, meet in a small group.

3. To build trust, show trust.

4. To be a better communicator, be who you are.

These are simple but effective ideas to help any leader get closer to their employee group, and improve the intimacy of their communication.   Check out the full Blog post for more information.

Is Failure an Option?

Posted on by

I was reading a great Blog Post by Jeffrey Baumgartner, on the cost of not implementing new innovations.  While the motivations are different for business, the idea is as true for local government as it is for business.  The cost of the status quo can be profound, and no one keeps track of the innovations we chose not to implement.  We all need to assess our ability to innovate, and much of that “ability” hinges on communication, empowerment, and a willingness to fail.

That’s right willingness to fail.  The biggest impediment to innovation is the fear of failure.  Unlike a business, we all live in a world where a bad day can be on the front page.  Local leadership has to ensure that our staffs believe that they will be supported for trying new things, and that we recognize that not all ideas are good ideas.

Thomas Edison was quoted as saying, “I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work.”  We need to create that type of environment if we want to spur innovation.   Sticky notes were created by trying to invent a new type of super glue, so you never fully know where the next great idea may come from.

What does your internal communication look like?  Does your staff feel that they have the real ability to influence change and bring forth ideas?  Do you have a good system, formal or informal, to get ideas from the trenches to the people with the ability to make it happen?  These are all key questions that you need to ask yourself.  Too often when looking to identify new opportunities we fail to look in the most obvious places.  The people that we rely on to perform the day to day functions will quite often have the greatest insight on where the opportunities lie.  We need to tap that resource and maximize the benefits.  Our ability to do more with less has never been more important.  We need to be certain that we have done our part to identify and implement that next great idea.