Commercial - Amateurs/Professionals

[BMC John Phillips III]

OK, Monday night football, not exactly the place I was expecting to find a good leadership quote, so I want to get some opinions on it.

The GMC commercial, talking about professional grade, they say,
"Amateurs work until they get it right; Professionals work until they can't get it wrong."

Now I am wise enough to know they didn't come up with that and some of you may have heard it before, but I haven't. I think I like it, but do you think that using it in as a training tool in our workplace environment would be effective or does it put too much pressure on the "amateurs?"

Professionalism is in my command philosophy and is very important to me. I consider myself an "aton professional." Should I expect my junior most non-rate to be/want to be or should I be satisfied that they are willing to "work until they get it right?"

[BMC Mark Emerson]

JP -

I think that is alright to expect the most junior to work until it is right. That is the best time to teach them this. there is the saying " If you don't make time to do it right the first time, there is always time to do it over!"

As a "ATON professional" you want to ensure that you most junior member has that same sense of pride and duty to complete the job right. I believe that you should set the bar high for your expectations, people want to succeed and if the culture is there to do it right always then it will get done.

my .02

Mark

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Leadership training is all about motivation. You can use this phrase (or any other phrase) if you think it might motivate someone. Leadership training will only work if those sitting through the training are willing to look inside and make positive changes. If you do use it, just ensure that everyone knows the meaning of it. It's a good phrase and has a good meaning...I wouldn't have a problem using it in the right context.

Oh and buy the way...GO BRONCOS!!!!

[SKC Ronald Brumble]

I believe there is another word that has a place in "Leadership". However no one likes the word because they will focus on the negative connotations.

Manipulation

We all do it to some degree. But it does not have to be negative.

Oh, and Mark, well put.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

I believe there is another word that has a place in "Leadership". However no one likes the word because they will focus on the negative connotations.

Manipulation

We all do it to some degree. But it does not have to be negative.

Please explain this...

[MSTCM Jerald Motyka]

If I may be so bold as to try:

By being a leader, we attempt to instill a sense of pride in our people. This may or may not be a natural state in them... hence, if you word it differently, we are not "leading", we are "manipulating" them.

I hear the word used by lots of anti-military folks and the word itself is rife with negative connotations... but it is a matter of perepective.

The best leaders I have served under were master manipulators. It has taken me a long time to realize that the two words ARE interchangeable. Kinda like 8oz of fluid in a 16oz glass... is it half full or half empty? Was Patton a great leader or a great manipulator? It depends on how you want to look at it.

(How'd I do with guestimating Ron's point??)

[BMCM Deane Smith]

OK...I guess I follow the logic, but I don't think we should be using that word in this context. I get what your saying, but there are better ways to say it. How about influence instead of manipulate? The problem is that the word manipulate has a negative tone, so I guess I question why it would be used in leadership discussions?

YOU Influencing OTHERS to Achieve a GOAL.

[SKC Ronald Brumble]

Jerald, you are one of the few to get it without me going into discussion. Thank you very much for putting it so well.

Deane that is exactly the point I was trying to make. Most folks will balk at the word. Too many times in our society the word is used to criticize and negatively label.

I use it when, hmm, "Adding words to books", to try and emphasize another point of view. Try and get folks to think outside the box.

It made you think for a moment didn’t it. :D

[SKC Raymond Kurtz (Ret)]

Was Patton a great leader or a great manipulator? It depends on how you want to look at it.

Patton was a great leader and a great manipulator.

Patton knew how to get the best out of his people, even if it meant intimidating them. Did he manipulate (use) his people to get more glory for himself? Absolutely. However, every great General (except maybe Bradley, he was the common soldier's General) used their troops for their own advancement. Patton's results indicate that he was on the right track. Plus, ask any surviving member of his command and they will all tell you how much they loved him. His leadership style is not for everyone, but he got results and that's all that matters.

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

To quote Webster: Manipulate "To manage or control artfully, often in an unfair or fraudulent way".

I see Deane's point as well. I understand what was being said, however, I think the english language, when used properly, can provide the point without using words that could be otherwise construed.

[SKC Ronald Brumble]

The word has many different meanings depending on the use.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+manipulation&btnG=Google+Search

But still, "to manage or control artfully"

When you read the last part, you are left with a negative feeling, but if you only read the first part, that is so true. "To manage or control artfully" isn't that what we all do to some degree?


By the way, I love these kinds of subjects :D

[MSTCM Jerald Motyka]

I look at one of Patton's great "leadership" victories. The Army was having a huge problem with foot injuries - trench foot and immersion foot. These debilitating conditions can be fought off by having two pairs of boots and alternating them daily so the "other" pair can dry out.

Patton couldn't REQUIRE his men to buy two pair - nor could he pay for them (or get the Army to pay for them). What'd he do?

He made a ruling: On even numbered dates, boots were to be laced left over right. On odd numbered dates, boots were to be laced right over left. He KNEW soldiers were lazy and would cut corners.

Did the soldiers change laces every night? Hell no! They went out and bought brand new boots and laced them opposite the old pair!! Voila! Problem solved!

A triumph in inspirational leadership... by the use of manipulation. Although one has a negative connotation, they are truly interchangeable.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

So Patton's soldiers were lazy........ while we're defining words........ I'll give you that they might want to cut corners.... but lazy they weren't. I think Gen. Patton would have agreed with me on that one also. Let's switch lazy for practical.

[SKC Ronald Brumble]

Our language is the only one that has these kinds of, well, problems. We have too many words if you ask me.

No, I'm not English major, nor have I had any formal English classes. But my point with this whole Idea of Leadership, Inspiration, Manipulation, Drive....it is a play on words. But it gets the brain cells stirring and for our new leaders out there it will hopefully get them to remember to look at things from other points of view. Just because some folks see nothing but the negative in a word does not mean that it can ONLY be used negatively.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Ron, can you give me an example were calling someone lazy could be seen as a compliment ? I have a brother-in-law who has a tatoo, that says "Born to be Lazy". He lives up to that motto. He might even take it as a compliment if you called him lazy........ but I don't think that you would have meant it to be taken that way. I'm not an English Professor either, but if I heard someone called lazy, I would think of it as a negative comment.

Now if you called it a lazy day, I could see understand that. But it has an entirely different meaning.

[SKC Ronald Brumble]

Well, if you notice, I did not refer to that word anywhere in my previous post. Lazy, means Lazy, there really is not other way to look at it. Unless you are using it to describe a sceen maybe. "The boy relaxed in the shade on a lazy afternoon." Ok, maybe not, ROFL ;)

That word does not realy spark anything. For that matter, why are you telling me about the "Lazy" word, I did not bring up that one!! :eek: That was Jerald, go jump his shit. :p

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Not jumping anywhere .......just asking the question ....... And with "Manipulation", it has a bad ring to it. It's like ignorant. Ignorant has an actual definition that can be very different from the way most people use it. You could say that someone is ignorant because in fact they actually are. But most people would be insulted if you told them they were ignorant.

To answer JP3's question........ if it works for you, use it. I don't like the phrase. Professionals get paid to do what amateurs do for free. Amateurs don't have to do things right, they just have to enjoy doing it. Professionals should remember they are being paid to perform a service. They should do what they are getting paid to do.

[MSTCM Jerald Motyka]

Hey Ron, what'd I ever do to you? You don't have to ASK Master Chief to debate me - I can incite his wrath from afar - and all alone!! :D

We, as a species, are lazy.

Yup. I said it.

We are constantly searching for new ways of making things easier and faster, so we can do things quicker. Of course, then there are people that jump on us and tell us that, since our 8-hour day can be done in 2 hours, then we need to put in six more... oh, well. Such is the life of progress.

We work our butts off for 20-30-or more years, just so we can retire and do... nothing but things we enjoy. Some might easily see that as laziness.

Patton had a problem, and took stock of the situation - and came up with the answer that made things easiest for him - and allowed the soldiers to come up with their "own" answer to get around the order... all to avoid (a) Fighting congress for $$$ for new boots, and (b) five minutes a night to relace boots. The "easy" answer was beneficial to the troops (as there were fewer foot problems), to Patton (as his troops could continue to fight), to the government (who didn't have to pay for the boots), and to the country (buying boots kept people employed).

We are constantly cutting corners, and a large percentage of us try to "get over" on everything from a couple bucks on a travel claim to screwing the IRS on our taxes. A good friend came up with a great oxymoron that I have used since high-school... "frantically lethargic". We are super willing to work like dogs, just so we can have five minutes to sit on our fourth-points-of-contact. Listen to our people when caught shirking... they will expend an inordinate amount of energy just to justify sitting down for fifteen minutes.

We, as a species (and nationality), are constantly striving to build the better mouse trap. Is it to catch more mice, or to save some time and make things easier?

Is that glass half empty or half full?? I never did say that "lazy" was bad. I am working my bottom parts off to get good marks and do a good job, just so I can get advanced and set up my people to replace me some day, just so I can eventually retire and sit on those dog-tired bottom parts for the rest of my live-long days. Yup. I'm lazy! :p

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Jerald, you need to look that word up..... it doesn't mean what you think it means. By working to do anything, you eliminate yourself from being lazy. Lazy people don't do verbs ..... Technology has allowed us to become lazier, .... but it's still your choice. Freeing up your time allows you to do more things,......or not. Again your choice.

Good soldiers have allowed our citizens to become as lazy as they want to be. But those soldiers are the ones doing things that allow other people the priveledge to do nothing.

[SKC Eric S. Highland]

Ok so we can argue semantics all day long, and sometimes it is worth the argument. But here it has strayed from the point.

Patton had the foresight, experience, and ability to figure a way around an obstacle to the mission he was assigned.

The point being not the soldiers and whether they were "lazy" or "practical".

The point being that Patton was a leader who in a sense "manipulated" his troops for the good of the mission, and for their personal protection.

He did this without having to give an order that would have brought about more trouble "buy yourselves a second pair" or having to fight an almost uphill and unwinnable battle with the Army "buy my troops another pair of boots".

It is this type of thinking that supports the structure of his legacy to leadership.

Just my thoughts..

v/r

[BMC John Phillips III]

What the hell does any of that have to do with amateur or professionals?

Ok, now that that's out of the way. I think a lot of this boils down to interpretation. Some people are interpretting "manipulation" as something that can be used in a positive way, while others and most would say it can't. Sort of like the "arrogant" thread. I don't think that the people that believe manipulation can be used in a good way would ever use it in a bad way. I just think they should work on their vocabulary; there are much better words to use, like inspire, encourage, coax, etc.. All close to manipulating but none carrying the negative connotation that manipulate does.

Jerald, do you have any kids? Have you heard the story about the Ant* and the grasshopper? You are describing yourself as the Ant not the grasshopper, the grasshopper was the lazy one. I am also pretty sure that any of Patten's soldiers ever heard of you calling them lazy that they'd muster up enough energy to correct you ;) again, probably just a poor choice of words. Something like, he knew they would be too worn out at the end of the day to switch the laces might have been more effective.

Back on track,

To answer JP3's question........ if it works for you, use it. I don't like the phrase. Professionals get paid to do what amateurs do for free. Amateurs don't have to do things right, they just have to enjoy doing it. Professionals should remember they are being paid to perform a service. They should do what they are getting paid to do.

BMCM, as always, you offer strong opinion and interesting view.

I think that there are amateurs that get paid to do what they like doing, they just get paid less. I also think that amateurs do have to do things right, it's just that they are less likely to always actually do them right. Of course Professionals can get it wrong too, even I know that. But in keeping with spirit of the quote, I believe that as Professionals we should strive to "not go wrong" but as leaders recognize that we are still susceptible to going wrong. I will take the portion about having both the amateurs and professionals "liking" what they are doing and add it to the mix before I present that phrase to my crew. After all, it's always easier to be good at something you like doing that something you don't.

[BMC Ralph Williams]

I think the crutch of the problem is that there are many words in the English language that we all have a preconceived definition for.

Bottom line is we need to see how the word is used in its context versus an already biased oppinion of the word.

As Ron said "step outside the box."

Ralph

[SKC Raymond Kurtz (Ret)]

Here's a thought. Contrast Patton's leadership style with Montgomery. Montgomery was by the book, refused to take chances and was very meticulous. Case in point. Operation Market-Garden, known to many as the Bridge Too Far. The plan was to take the Rhine river bridge at Arnhem. To do that required the dropping of an airborne carpet that would seize the bridges leading to Arnhem. It also the required the travel of tanks down a very narrow road. There were too many problems for the plan to succeed, lack of good planning in the even that a bridge was blown by the Germans. Radios that didn't work. The biggest problem was timidity on the part of the British 30 Corp commander, who by the way, reported directly to Monty. After the final bridge was blown, the British tanks were within striking distance of Arnhem. So what happened. The British stopped, thereby leaving their comrades trapped in Arnhem.

Replace the 2nd armored division with 30 Corps, wanna guess what would have happend? Patton would not have stopped, he would have kept right on going. Patton was a warrior. Monty was an administrator that won his glory in the deserts of North Africa.

[BMC John Phillips III]

Master Chief, I concede. This thread will never get back on track now. Thanks General (Jerald) Patton!

[SKC Ronald Brumble]

In an effort to get back on track

Amateurs might manipulate people to get the job done.

Professionals might manipulate people to want to do a better job.

Play on words, yes. You could just a easily say; Professionals might inspire people to want to do a better job.

How do we truly determine if someone is a professional or an amateur. In the military that is. We have heard the saying, "When you make Chief you are considered to be an Expert in your field." Can you just switch Expert for Professional? Training, and leadership styles are also an argument for what would set someone apart from the two. I have seen Chiefs that have less than 7 years under their belt. Are we going to say that based on time in they are considered Amateur?

[MKC Art Bailly (Ret)]

In the Coast Guard we are professional Jack of all trades.

[SKC Ronald Brumble]

Good answer!!!

[SKC Raymond Kurtz (Ret)]

In the Coast Guard we are professional Jack of all trades.

Especially as SK, unlike the Navy that has a bunch of different ratings that does the job of an SK in the Coast Guard.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

See you can't base it on time, experience, or position if you talk about "being" professional. Again you're looking at different definitions of the word. But as for being professional, I've seen situations where the most professional person present was also the most junior person. And I've sen situations where the person that you expected to act the most professional, was acting like the biggest amateur.