The importance of a thorough evaluation of a job offer is not limited to the offer itself; it includes a thorough evaluation of the employer.

Most articles on the subject of “evaluating a job offer” focus on the job itself — on the work that you will do if you say “Yes.”  You are asked to consider whether the job will be challenging enough to satisfy you, whether there is room for growth, and whether the rate of pay is sufficient.  But seldom are these the issues that lead to the exclamation, “I quit!”

If you’ve been out of work for any length of time, you very likely have uttered the phrase, “I’ll take the first job that is offered to me!” Particularly as the financial picture grows more bleak, it is difficult to see past the value of a paycheck without regard for its source.

Accepting a new position with a new company or organization is a big commitment. And just like the commitments the we do or do not make in personal relationships, the commitment to a new employer takes very serious consideration. As tempting as the security of a paycheck can be, you just might be headed for an expensive disaster if you jump in without much thought beyond the income.

While there is no such thing as the “perfect office environment” (Google may be an exception to that rule), an office bully, a supervisor who lacks integrity, or a CEO who has lost her passion for her job, can all spell big-time trouble and make those 40 hours a week too difficult to bear. 

But how do you spot the red flags before accepting the job offer?  And which problems are harmless enough to justify the paycheck? 

Paychecks vs. Problems

You are the answer to the question of whether a problem is harmless enough to justify accepting a less-than-ideal job.  Only you know your tolerance level. We all have a boiling point, but what it takes to reach that point varies from person to person. 

From the petty to the serious, a problem is a problem, and you need to anticipate your tolerance level.  Some of us can ignore the rude secretary who thinks she is the CEO, or the talkative office manager with a voice so shrill that it literally causes you to cringe — day in, and day out.  Others of us are so sensitive to these things that we dread going to work each day.

Think about your past employment situations.  What problems did you face, and how well did you handle them?  What types of problems would be deal-breakers for you, personally?  It is important that you are honest when you do this assessment and do your best to not let your financial difficulties sway you to make a decision you might regret.

Accepting a job that inevitably ends with your resignation due to an uncomfortable environment or other problems at work can be very expensive.  Depending on your individual situation, those expenses could include the purchase of a car, new wardrobes, salon visits, hiring a nanny or enrolling your toddler in daycare, and the h u g e expenses involved with relocating — all of which adds up quickly.   

Red Flags

The list of problems that might be encountered with a new employer is as long as there are industries and jobs.  In general, however, you want to be wary of the following:

• Employers that struggle to meet payroll may have serious problems.  Be careful.
• A history of suits against the company — especially Employment Law cases — should be a big red flag, not to be ignored.
• A high turnover rate of employees is not a good sign. 
• High or frequent turnover with the executive office and/or upper management personnel.  Has the CEO been with the company a long time?  Is the Board of Director’s filled with credentialed members, or is it made up of only family members — including the 93-year-old grandmother?
• Public slamming of the company by customers and/or employees is another red flag.

Dig Deep

Once you recover from the initial euphoria of hearing, “You’re hired!”, take enough time to thoroughly investigate whether this is the right employer for you.  The economic damages that can result from a failure to properly vet the new employer may be more difficult to handle than the limitations imposed by unemployment.

When you begin your digging, search each of the following (where relevant), using the company name as well as the name of the CEO.  To be really thorough, search the names of the members of the Board of Director’s, as well:

• Dig deep into Google, going well beyond the first 3 pages of search results. 
• Look up the company’s registration with the Secretary of State. 
• Search Case.net in the state where the company is registered.  Civil and criminal actions against the employer — past or present — are easily discovered.
• Look into the Chamber of Commerce. Is the company a member? Past member?
• Check LinkedIn and read the individual profiles of the employees who pop up on the company’s profile.
• If your potential employer is noted on the Complaints Board website, you won’t want to miss it. It’s worth a quick search, and my test of the search feature indicates it is very likely to find your search term if it is in the database.
• Check the Better Business Bureau to review the status of the company.
• Go to sites like The Ripoff Report, and the Business Reporter.
• Go to the Consumer Complaint section of the website for your state’s Attorney General‘s office.  Search for the company name.
• Your state should have an Employment Commission. Google it.  Then, check the site.
• The US Department of Labor, OSHA Division may be useful, depending on the employer.

Evaluate Communication Skills and Practices

Before you sign that employment contract or accept an employee-at-will position, analyze the effectiveness of the communication between the employer and employees. Have a one-on-one conversation with the person who will be your immediate supervisor and, during the conversation, take note of the following:

• Does the conversation seem one-sided? Does your potential supervisor do all of the talking, or do s/he leave room for you?
• When you talk, are you heard? Does the supervisor some how indicate that s/he is actually listening and absorbing your points?
• When you ask a question, is it answered? Be careful for the “avoid and redirect” technique used by those who often fail to address the concerns of employees.
• Does the supervisor follow through when s/he says, “I’ll get back to you.”  Does the person call or email by the time s/he promised, or does the ball get dropped?

Face-to-Face Inquiry

After you’ve been offered the job, but before you accept it, you need to ask some specific questions, face-to-face.  Tell the hiring manager that before you can give them an answer, you’d like to meet personally with the person who will be your direct supervisor.  If they are unwilling or reluctant to allow you that meeting, ask yourself “Why?” It’s a huge red flag if they say “No.”

Like the list of problems you can encounter with a new employer, the list of questions to be asked is endless — but you need to keep it relatively short or you’ll come across as tedious and insecure.  Tailor the suggested questions, below, to your industry, position, and situation.  And, don’t hesitate to add to the list.  The purpose of the face-to-face meeting is more than having your questions answered:  You also want another chance to evaluate how well your supervisor communicates.

You need to ask some very pointed questions that may never become relevant, but if they do become an issue, you want to know up front how they will be addressed. The exact wording of the questions will depend on the level of employment you are offered, but regardless of the wording, the answer to the question is telling:

• “What is the social environment of the office? Do employees tend to socialize after work, or does everyone go their separate way?
• “Do you host things like ‘Staff Day at the Ball Park,’ or ‘Family Picnic Day,” — those type of social events — for the employees? If so, how good is the turn-out for these events?
• Are employee birthdays and/or employment anniversaries celebrated in the office?
• What is the policy or practice for gift-giving during the Christmas season?
• If there is a conflict between employees, what is the procedure for filing a complaint — and how is it typically handled?
• If an immediate supervisor does not address the complaints, concerns, or questions which are asked of him/her, what is the policy?
• Is there a general sense of camaraderie and teamwork in the office, or do employees tend to be unilateral in their approach?
• Are there any lawsuits for employment-related issues pending against the company?
• What is the one complaint most often received by HR from personnel?

Realize that you aren’t asking these questions to find out if you can distribute tins of cookies during the holidays.  You want an idea about the environment. The social environment — or culture — of the office is particularly important given the number of hours a day you are likely to spend with your co-workers. And if a conflict arises between yourself and another employee — especially someone who has been on the payroll longer than you — you must have a good idea of what to expect.

Dig Deeper

So what do you do if you start seeing red flags?  How do you know the difference between an unjustified disgruntled employee rant posted on Facebook vs. real problems?  You will be well served by digging deeper, particularly if the new job will require you to relocate.

The people who currently work for your potentially new employer are the best source of inside information.  You want to try to discover whether you can expect a comfortable office environment.  You want to know what complaints are most frequently brought to the attention of management, and what complaints are discussed privately around the cafeteria vending machines.  To dig into this kind of information, you need to network with those employees in a way that is appropriate yet also effective.

LinkedIn is a great source for making those valuable connections.  If possible, follow the comments of a few employees who are active in LinkedIn groups.  Very often, employees take to the internet to post damaging comments about their current employer, regardless of how stupid it is to do so.  Take advantage of that stupidity.  And if you can begin conversing online with one or two current employees on topics unrelated to the employer, you’ll set yourself up to be able to appropriately inquire about the working environment you’ll encounter if you take the job.

Your Decision

When it comes right down to it, the kids need to be fed.  There are some people who cannot afford – quite literally – to consider saying ”No” to a job offer.   Only you know your situation.  And even a bad job, once obtained, puts you in a better position to find a good job, so long as you can tough it out in the meantime.

 ~Lynda C. Watts

I support Autism Speaks. Join me in the fight against autism.

More about careers, employment, and work? Check out some of these fan-favorites:

• NPO Leadership: CEO’s with Control Issues
• Seek & Find: Love & Labor — Get a Job, Find a Date
• Narrowing Your Focus to Expand Your Options
• How To Deal with Job Search Rejection

Want more?  Click on the “Work” category in the sidebar for a full list of articles on the subject by Lynda C. Watts.  And don’t forget to explore the other categories, too!  Keeping it all in balance is the key to success, and Lynda knows exactly what it takes. 

Have a question or a request?  Email Lynda for a personal reply, or to have your topic addressed in an upcoming article.

We are a living example of unconditional love and acceptance, whether that means bighting one’s tongue through the periodic autistic tantrum, or the discretion required to support the illiterate amongst us who struggles to read a menu at a restaurant. Whatever the challenge, no matter how difficult, embarrassing, or heart-breaking, we get through it together as families are meant to do.
Our world is unique, but it is ours.

A year ago today, in preparation for the traditional New Year’s Eve family celebration, I pawned a few remaining trinkets in exchange for enough cash to buy 2 bottles of cheap champagne and a bag of chips. We dressed up in our best but old clothes and celebrated the changing year as if we were something special – because we are. And though there was much missing from our lives, we focused on the good. We focused on each other – our colorful, character-filled family.

We laughed and played, and teased one another. We took photos, told “Remember When” stories, and created more memories. When midnight arrived, we kissed our loved ones then banged pots and pans out in the chilly country night air.

And when the incessant buzz in our ears dissipated after we put away the pots and pans, we unknowingly walked straight into a new year that brough significant changes for us in our unique world. A new job for me meant the end of government assistance for everyone. And as frightening as change can be, we collectively held our breath and dove head first into our future.

We packed up and moved out of the toxic town that was a daily nightmare due to the rampant racism and corruption of local law enforcement. And though we are now living in 1/3 of the space, situated in two different townhomes near one another, the loss of residential luxury is barely noticed, so satisfied are we in a new city filled with hope and promise.

We’ve welcomed new family members into the brew, one of whom came to us sooner than expected by her early birth, and 3 more who arrived in a Budget Rental Truck. Other family members came and went but remain close — as close as possible with the use of cell phones and Facebook.

We’ve made new friends, and found new hang-outs. New routines are established. And though, to the chagrin of all my kids, I am still not dating, I am at least finally thinking about it.

Some of us are a bit thinner than we were 365 days ago, the result not of eating less but of eating better. Others in our family are a bit larger, also the result of eating better and escaping the plight of malnutrition brought on by poverty.

New clothes and shoes magically transform the posture of those in our family who’ve lived too long with slumped shoulders and hanging chins. And for the ladies amongst us, there’s a medicinal quality to the frivolity of a manicure, pedicure, and a touch of fresh hair color.

And, so, here we are – 365 days later – still the same, but oh-so-different.

As I write this, I hear the giggles of a vivacious 3-year-old who tries the patience of her mother as she attempts to braid row after row of thick, black hair on her beautiful little head. It’s a big job, but looking our best for New Year’s Eve is part of our tradition. Every once in awhile, as her mother finishes another row of braids, she runs up to my room to proudly announce, “Look, Granny! I’m pretty!”

As she bounces away, I watch out the window and see my biological son with his diseased-ridden legs, gimping from his townhouse to my car in search of CDs; the music for our New Year’s gala this evening is his responsibility – and he takes his responsibilities seriously. I hear the sound of a bouncing basketball. It’s another of my kids enjoying his Christmas gift on a day full of sunshine and comfortable temperatures. He tries to distract his white brother from his chores. He fails, and walks away looking for someone else in the family who might be willing to play. I have no doubt he’ll find someone. And then, he does.

There is a full size ham slowly roasting in the crock pot, filling the townhouse with a tantalizing aroma. It’s a real ham, the kind Grandma used to bake for Christmas – not the kind that is squeezed into a can and distributed by a food pantry.

The peacefulness of my last day of the year is interrupted only by the phone. At last count, by noon, I’ve answered 7 calls from kids who call me Mom – the last one being from my biological daughter. It was a sad call. “I miss my family…” she said, through tears. “I’ll come see you tomorrow,” I promised. “I’ll stay overnight. We’ll do whatever you want to do.” It eased her home-sickness, a home-sickness born not from a place but from the feeling of family.

Today, when I run to the store to buy our party supplies, I’ll pull out my debit card and slide it through the reader with little concern for the sales total. As evening arrives, the kids will filter in, dressed in something sparkly or handsome. On this last day of 2011, the last day to enjoy our Christmas lights that traditionally sparkle until midnight, the champagne will be plenty – and it won’t be the cheapest bottle on the shelf.

We’ll toast to ourselves and to our friends, but mostly we’ll toast to those of us who we consider family who can’t be with us tonight – my biological daughter, half a dozen “sons” stuck in the city of St. Louis, and many more from coast to coast and up into Canada.

We will play games, take photos, tease, and laugh. New memories will be made, new stories created. And as the New Year arrives, we’ll kiss our loved ones and — neighbors-be-damned –we’ll bang pots and pans out in the chilly night air — till the incessant buzz in our ears once again ushers us into our future.

Happy New Year.

The economy has forced so many families to re-prioritize, to swallow their pride, and to make sacrifices that used to belong only to the poverty class — a class that has grown to include more than ever since the Great Depression. What we are thankful for now was, perhaps, something we took for granted in our past. Our lives are forever changed, and in spite of the difficulties and challenges resulting from our economic climate, some of those changes aren’t so bad for humanity.

This year, I am thankful to finally have a conventional job. I’m thankful for the large extended “family” of mine that will share the dinner table with me on Thanksgiving day. That extended “family” is made up of young adults who know more than anyone the definition of “challenge” and “hardship,” who are themselves thankful for the opportunity they now have to pursue an education without worrying about how to feed their babies, etc. And I’m grateful that I’m still able to offer them that chance, to mentor and teach them; it is as rewarding for me as the end result is for them!

To all of my readers, this Thanksgiving — whether your food is from the food pantry or not — my wish for you is a day to cherish what you have. I hope you can set aside, even temporarily, the thought that you’ve perhaps gone backwards economically, that you have less than you used to have, and that the light at the end of the tunnel seems so far away. For the day, I wish for you the ability to be deeply appreciative of the freedoms we have as citizens of the United States, and an awareness of the price for that freedom.

Happy Thanksgiving.

Now, some 2 months or so later, I am just beginning to feel as if I’m settling into a routine.  My progress with my primary new job is significantly better than the progress in my new residence.  Moving from a 6000 sq. foot house to a 1100 sq. ft. townhouse is challenging, indeed.  Thus, I still dodge cardboard boxes which hold contents for which I have no space. 

It’s a welcomed problem in comparison to the challenges of unemployment, however. And I frequently think of those of you who have not yet found the right career move.  You are a big reason I started this blog, and in spite of my busy schedule, I intend to continue it (albeit at a slightly slower pace).

A Hiring Story

In addition to accepting the role of C.E.O. for Life Giving Force Foundation, a fantastic nonprofit dedicated to saving lives by providing clean water solutions in the neediest regions of the world, I am the new Senior Director of Development at Heartland Soccer Association.  HSA is also a nonprofit, but one with an entirely different focus.

Within the first few days of employment with HSA, the division manager quit his job.  It was his response to 1) my placement within the supervisory hierarchy, and 2) his erroneous belief that I was there to replace him.  Or, perhaps, it was a response to my request to him to provide me with a status report for the division.  Whatever the reason, I was left with a train wreck. 

As it turned out, the development division was bleeding profusely, costing the organization rather than supporting it.  The Executive Director knew that “something” wasn’t right (which lead to the creation of my new position), but because the only management that the division manager managed involved wool-pulling rather than actual marketing and sales, I faced a complete overhaul.

The good news: The overhaul and restructuring allowed me to hire an entirely new sales team, and to properly train the existing associates who’d managed to muddle through their jobs, without direction, but also without commission earnings.  Frankly, I don’t know why they stuck it out as long as they did!  

Because I needed a marketing and sales staff “yesterday,” the hiring process was drastically streamlined.  There was no time to post a single ad.  But, there was time to do some searching on my own using Linked-In, and to interview referrals.

Lesson:  Job opportunities are not necessarily reflected on the job boards.

There are few better feelings in the business world, in my opinion, than that of offering a job to someone.

I’ve written extensively on the subject of “how to get a job.”  A few of the candidates interviewing with me clearly learned the Do’s and Don’ts of job search and interviewing tactics in today’s market.  Most, however, did not.

The Applicants Who Did Not Get Past Email

The people who wrote cover letters that were too lengthy, including the guy who sent a 6-page cover and a 1-page resume’.

The people who neglected to attach a resume’ to their email.  (SO MANY! Seriously?!)

The folks that sounded desperate, especially the lady who wrote, “I’ll do anything that allows me to feed the kids, pay the rent, and get my nails done when needed.”  (No joke.)

The Candidates Who Interviewed But Did Not Get Hired

The young woman who had a Master’s degree, intensely heavy black eyeliner, cleavage that was far too visible, and 7 inch heels.

The one-time marketing and sales manager with significant experience who provided 5 reference letters, all type-written (including the references’ signatures) in the same font, on the same paper, using the same sentences.

The charismatic woman who also had the basic KSA’s I sought, but who repeatedly interrupted me during the interview.

The man who won every sales award with his past employer but who failed to bring his resume’ to the interview.  “Don’t you have the copy I sent to you in email?” he asked in response to my question, “Do you have a resume’ for me?”

The Candidate Who I Wanted to Hire but Who Gave Me Reason to Choose Someone Else

The man who presented a great resume’, excellent KSA’s, interviewed really well, but who thereafter neglected to send a thank-you note.  When I weighed this particular candidate against a similarly qualified candidate, I went with the guy who sent the thank-you note.

The Candidates I Hired Included. . .

The newly graduated young man with no sales experience but with a fantastic personality, excellent communication skills, a professionally prepared resume’, and a willingness to learn.

The woman with the amazing vocabulary and ability to articulate in a way that is truly impressive, who admitted that this was not a life-long career goal but that she would fully commit herself to the job, and who shared a passion for humanitarian concerns.

The man with a minor amount of experience in sales who was currently employed on a landscaping crew in spite of his Master’s degree, to make ends meet while he sought employment in sports marketing, who was dressed for success and clearly did his homework regarding the company.

The Lesson

I’ve said it time and time again:  It comes down to the connection you make with your interviewer during the interview. It’s all about relationships.  Always.

So long as you get past the initial screening, making sure you do all that is required of you concerning your resume’, cover letter, and any other submission requirements, your KSA’s are ultimately only a minor part of the equation when the hiring authority makes his or her decision.

How I Got My New Job + 1

I intend to write a full article on this topic, but until I do — and because so many of you are asking — here is the short answer.

An old friend found me on Facebook.  From the age of 9 to 12, he was my sweetheart at church camp for a week every summer.  By the time I was 12, he picked a new girlfriend, Daphne, who clearly was more developed than I was at that age. 

Some 30+ years later, just as I was searching for a leadership position with a nonprofit, he was searching for a leader for two of his organizations.  After nearly 5 months of correspondence, phone calls, proposals, Board meetings, and emails, the job offers were finally made to me — and I accepted.

The Lesson:  Network!  Dig deep.  Scour your old yearbooks. Send a note to an old friend just to say “hello”, and accept the Friend Request you receive from the kid with whom you went to kindergarten.  Connect, connect, connect. 

Ya’ just never know.

~Lynda C. Watts

What follows is a random list — in no particular order of importance — of considerations for your resume’.  Use it as a check-list before submitting your document for consideration by a hiring authority.

As  reminder, “ATS” stands for Applicant Tracking System.  It is a computer program used by most employers to pre-qualify applicants.  Your resume’ will first be subjected to the ATS.  If the computer program doesn’t choose you, neither will a human.  So, preparing your resume’ to be “ATS friendly” is imperative.

1) With only rare exception, your resume’ should be organized as follows:

• Header: name, address, phone numbers, email address.

• Title:  For ATS purposes, state that it is a resume’.

• Objective:  A statement of your intention.

Sample: Seeking a Directorship or C-level position in Operations, Communications, and/or Program Management with a superior and established nonprofit organization that is committed to excellence.  Offering broad skill-set, traditional work ethic, and achievement of expert status with multi-industry experience.

• Key Competencies:  A relatively short bulleted list of your BEST achievements.  Nothing vague here! Don’t say “Professional and effective leadership skills.”  Say, “Catalyst for a 75% reduction in attrition after assuming leadership role for support staff.”

• Alternative names:  Executive Summary, Key Achievements, Summary

• Education:  From highest to lowest degrees earned, followed by additional certifications.  Spell out the degree, “Masters in Business Administration”, “Bachelors of Arts,” and so on.

• Professional Experience:  In reverse chronological order, list your work experience that is relevant to the particular job submission.  Title of your position, Employer’s Name, Employer’s City, State, Zip Code, Month and Year of start and end dates, followed by ACHIEVEMENTS, not job duties.

• Director of Operations | ABC Co., St. Louis, MO. 63017  | Aug. 2008 – Present

• Additional Relevant Experience:  depending on the topic, this is where you would put volunteer service, committee memberships, and so forth.

• Awards & Recognitions and/or Publications & Presentations:  If you have ‘em, list ‘em.

• Computer Skills:  For some submissions, this is an important area.  List your software skills, including the name of the program and your level of proficiency.

2)  NEVER end a resume’ with “References Available Upon Request.”  That sentence does not belong on your resume’ at all.

3)  Keep fancy formatting to a minimum.  No photos unless you are applying for a art-related position.

4)  Your personal data (gender, birth date, social security number, marital status, religious or political affiliations) should NEVER be on your resume’.

5)  Achievements, achievements, achievements!

That’s what matters.  Job duties and a job description are rarely needed.  If you are convinced that your audience won’t know what you were responsible for as “Director of Programs,” then keep your description short, pointed, and impressive:  “Responsible for a staff of 200 and the direction of more than 500 programs in a 2 year time span.”

Examples of genuine achievements –

6)  Less is more.  If you say all there is to say, not only will your document be too long, you limit your ability to sing your own praises in an interview.

7)  If you create your resume’ using a table, it will not lose its formatting when transmitted.  Just hide the lines of the table after you’re done creating the document!

8)  A pdf version of your resume’ is best, if there is not a restriction regarding the type of document you can email.

The pdf document cannot be accidentally manipulated by the receiver, and it maintains its appearance.

9)  Do not use “full justification” for any of the resume’ text.

If you do, it leaves awkward spacing.  Instead, using a table for the foundation, either use left-justification or centering, depending on the item.

10)  Color will not print well in black and white.  If you use colors, such as to shade a heading block, make sure it is light enough that a b&w printing will not distort the text.

11)  Never use colored text.  (exception: artsy type jobs)

12)  Achievements, achievements, achievements!

It bears repeating because it’s so important.  A hiring authority wants to know how you stand out from everyone else.  What makes you better than the other guy?  Your past achievements are the best way to demonstrate that you ARE better than your competition.

13)  When choosing your achievements:

Think of things that demonstrate a) a problem, b) your identification of that problem, c) your answer to that problem, d) how you carried out that resolution, and e) the result.

Example:  Solved an emergent trademark issue in 24 hours by creating a new program overnight, saving an organization from complete shut-down.

14) Proper use of the backslash:

When you use the backslash or forward-slash key, put a space before and after the keystroke.  In some instances, the divider key ” | ” is a better choice.

CEO/President  — will read as one word by a computer.

CEO / President — each word will be found by ATS

15) Spell it out!

With the exception of chief officer titles ( CEO / CCO / COO / etc.), spell out abbreviations and acronyms.  “Mngmt” or “mgmt” or some other version will not be read as “management” by an ATS.

16)  Consistency is a sign of your ability to pay attention to detail.

Thus, if you capitalize the first word in a list, make sure that each first word is capitalized.  Ending punctuation must likewise be consistent.  Here are examples:

Wrong Way

• Microsoft Word
• power point;
• adobe photo shop.

Right Way

• Microsoft Word;
• Power Point;
• Adobe Photo Shop.

17)  Read your resume’ out loud.

It’s the ONLY way to properly proof read it and find the small mistakes most of us inevitably make.

18)  Tailor your resume’ to the job description!

Yes, it takes work — but you either want the job, or you don’t.  Those who go the extra mile tend to find employment sooner than later.

19)  Paying a professional to write your resume’ does not guarantee perfection.

Yesterday, I read someone’s resume’ who apparently obtained a “Bachelor of Psychology”.  On inquiry, I discovered that this was an error made by the resume’ writer, and not caught by the candidate.  It should have said, “Bachelor of Arts in Psychology.”

20)  Ad nauseum?

Though you may be sick to death of reading, revising, and considering your resume’, you need to look it over EACH time you intend to submit it to an employer.  Tailor it, proof read it, revise it as needed — and only hit “send” when you believe it is perfected.

~ Lynda C. Watts

About the Author
Find Lynda on LinkedIn
Send Lynda an email
Lynda’s Professional Profile

I’ve written about leadership, and I’ve written about nonprofits, but I’ve yet to write specifically about nonprofit leadership.  It’s time.

And, for the record — the concepts I’ll be discussing apply equally to the for-profit leader as they do to NPO leadership.  It’s just that, somehow, when a nonprofit leader exhibits unsavory and unfavorable characteristics (as we shall discuss), it is that much more unacceptable.  Nonprofits, in general, are founded on heart and soul.  So how can it be that an NPO leader can seem to lack that very thing?

Earlier today, I read a phenomenal blog post written by authors Chantal Laurie Below and Kimberly Dasher Tripp, on the Stanford Social Innovation Review.

You might also enjoy reading the entire article, “Freeing the Social Entrepreneur“. (It’s even lengthier than my blog articles, but it’s worthwhile!)

In their article, Ms. Below and Ms. Tripp begin by telling the story of a successful female investment banker, Suzanne Morris, who made a drastic career adjustment when she went to work for a small nonprofit as its COO.  The mission of the nonprofit resonated with her, and its CEO garnered her deep respect and admiration.

But there was not a happy ending for Suzanne with the nonprofit.  The CEO, as it turned out, made it impossible.  She had control issues.

A CEO is a Leader

Before you say, “Duh!” consider this: While it might sound far too obvious to point out that a CEO is a leader, it seems that there is a population of CEO’s who have yet to discover this fact, or to understand what it actually means.  This article is directed to them, as well as to those of you who find yourselves the subordinate of one of these characters.

Suzanne Morris found herself in that position.  As much as she respected and admired her new boss, she couldn’t penetrate the CEO’s perpetual force field of control, possession, and insecurity.

Red flags waved early for Suzanne.  She discovered that in the preceding 18 month period, the CEO went through 3 COO’s before Suzanne took the position.  As the 4th COO, Suzanne was determined to make it work.

Morris was told that she would be responsible for human resources (HR), legal, technology, and board management, as well as responsible for managing everyone except the controller, who reported to the CEO (and happened to be the CEO’s sister). Morris felt that if she’d survived the rough-and-tumble world of investment banking, she could certainly tackle this challenge.

Some mountains just can’t be moved, it seems, and Suzanne faced one of those mountains.

Like Suzanne, I have also attempted to move mountains that can’t be moved.  In fact, her experience so closely mirrored an experience of my own, I had to make sure that what I was reading wasn’t a forgotten publication of mine!

As written by Below and Tripp, Suzanne Morris faced an impossible challenge and found it necessary to resign:

Over the next nine months . . . Morris learned that the dynamic CEO whom she had admired resisted processes and systems, asserted tight control over all details, avoided delegation, felt threatened by opposing views, and contributed to a negative staff culture. It seemed that the CEO was not prepared for a strong management team or aware of the opportunity that having a strong team would present. . . . By refusing to relinquish control, the CEO missed an opportunity to fully engage Morris and capitalize on her strengths.

If you are a regular reader of my work, you might remember “Fred” and “Barney”.  Suzanne’s CEO so resembles Fred and Barney, that I shall call her Wilma.

Wilma, it seems, is unaware that a CEO is a leader.  Instead, she operates in a vacuum.  Her tunnel vision precludes her from seeing opportunities.  What would work best for her is a team of drones, mechanical bots that heed her every whim but that cannot otherwise think for themselves.

We’ve all seen these types of executive officers.  They do not trust in anyone’s ability outside of their own.  Instead of leading, they dictate.  Instead of providing a vision from which a team can develop and achieve, they cage the very folks who are intended to paint the mural.  They fail in their leadership role.

Building Trust

Some CEOs argue that it is necessary for them to hold tightly to the reigns until the COO (or CFO, CLO, etc.) proves his value.  This begs the question, “If you mistrust the value of the new hire, why did you hire him in the first place?”

Inarguably, it takes time for trust to be established in a professional relationship such as exists between a CEO and her subordinate chief executive officers, vice presidents, and other C-suite level professionals.  It takes time for a new hire to prove that she can do the job she was hired to do.  But if her hands are tied — if the CEO does not trust her enough to let her dance the dance for which she auditioned and was hired — there’s no reason to start the music.

When the CEO is like Wilma — a controller — trust is nearly impossible.

Identifying the Controlling CEO

Suzanne took a leap of faith when she left her successful investment banking job to pursue a career in nonprofits.  As it turned out, she lost nearly a year of career time to learn a hard lesson:  You can’t play on a team with a captain who won’t pass the ball.

How can others of us avoid making this mistake?  What signs are there that the CEO for whom you may decide to work is going to turn out to be like Wilma?

Here are a few red flags:

Grandiosity

Understanding that the person who is controlling is also most often insecure, consideration should be given to a primary element of the narcissistic personality: grandiosity.

When one feels insecure, and when that same person also tends toward narcissism (frequently observed in over-achievers and under-achievers, but less likely in those who are median achievers), we often see characteristics of grandiosity.

Psychologists point to the idea of a “grander self” being created by the insecure person in order to please or deceive others. But eventually, these folks believe their own lies. There is also a theory that the narcissist sincerely believes — to his core — that he is a uniquely special person and therefore deserving of adoration and praise.

In the business world, this kind of person presents himself as a hero. He will attempt to impress you with stories of how he defeated this or that business foe, stood against the odds and overcame obstacles in a super-hero manner.

He will emphasize his accomplishments and abilities, his credentials, and his acquaintances with well-known people.  And though you, too, will make statements regarding your achievements and so-forth in the interview setting, notice that it is appropriate for you to do so in that context; it is inappropriate and out-of-context for him, however.  You’ll notice that the hiring interview is out of balance and more focused on him and his value than on you and your value to the organization.

Domination

The controller feels compelled to dominate.  She will inject her opinion regardless of the appropriateness of doing so.  She will make demands that encroach on your autonomy.  She will correct or contradict you in front of others, asserting her own position as one that is somehow more credible.

In business, she will micro-manage. She will tell you what to do, how to do it, when to do it, she’ll watch you do it, and then demand that you “run it by her for approval” once it’s done.  It won’t matter that she’s relatively inexperienced, especially in comparison to you and your 20 year history as a Director of Operations for a Fortune 500, or that you have a personal recommendation from Bill Gates and Steve Jobs; she’s the boss and it’s her way or the highway.

In an interview, you might notice that she repeatedly exhibits her domination tendency with comments like, “After I approve it ….”, “If I think you have a good idea, then ….”, and “You’ll want to run it by me before you ….”  Note that these statement alone do not identify a controlling personality, that it is in their cumulative use — when the CEO repeatedly makes these statements — that you might realize you’re dealing with someone who will make your life impossible.

The Devil in the Details

The controller thrives on details.  And while details are seldom unimportant, it is generally not the CEO’s job to waste time with them.  A CEO, for example, who spends time worrying about the details of the email sent out by employees, might very likely be a controller.

In an interview, a controlling CEO may ask for details about a project you completed — and that’s fine.  But if he pushes you for more details than is necessary to demonstrate your proficiency and ability, especially if the details he seeks are in no way indicative of your knowledge, skills, an abilities for the position you are seeking, consider it a red flag.

General Inappropriateness

When you meet in person with a controlling CEO, it typically will not take long for you to feel a sense of being ill-at-ease.  You may not be able to pin-point the cause of this feeling, but don’t ignore it.

Instead, tune in to the subtleties of the CEO’s behavior. Note whether he seems to exhibit less-than-appropriate or blatantly inappropriate behavior.  For example, “man to man,” he might start making snide remarks about his wife.  Or, the manner in which he speaks to a support staff member may strike you as insensitive, rude, tyrannical, or all of the above.

Rudeness

The controller is often rude.  This stems from a lack of empathy, compassion, and simple kindness.  The rude CEO who is also controlling will repeatedly interrupt you (What you have to say isn’t nearly as important as what he wants to say.)  He will seldom make eye contact when engaged in a conversation, not because he’s multi-tasking but because he hasn’t truly engaged with you in the first place.  He’s half-listening, at best.  You’re just not important enough.

Identity Issues

The controlling CEO has tunnel vision.  As I mentioned earlier, “It’s her way or the highway.”  This is not always because the person is a tyrant; it is often because the individual lacks the ability to appreciate the uniqueness of others.  Life exists as she sees it — and there is nothing more.  As a result, she will define you rather than perceive the persona you project.

In business, she seems to totally disregard your skills, abilities, and experience.  In spite of the fact that she “knows” you ran the Giving Programs for another nonprofit and brought in an impressive amount for a previously under-funded program, you overhear her tell a Board Member that you will require training before she allows you to manage a funding project.

You are who she wants you to be, not who you really are.  She does the defining; not you.

The Bottom Line

Here’s the bottom line:  A controlling CEO will ultimately fail.  If it’s a nonprofit s/he is running, it, too, will ultimately fail. You, the job seeker, need to decide whether it is worth the trouble that will inevitably plague you as you try to work for and with this person.  In all but the rarest cases, I can’t imagine that it would be.

And you if YOU are the controlling CEO, you likely reached your position as the result of starting your own business and proclaiming yourself to be the leader. In the unlikely event that you climbed the ranks traditionally, it is very likely that a good deal of bullying accompanied you on that climb.

If you recognize your behavior as that of a controller, or if you hear echoes of complaints you’ve received along that line, you are urged by the rest of us to take a close look at yourself.  Then, please seek help.  You’ll be the better for it.  And so will the rest of us!

~Lynda C. Watts

About the Author
Find Lynda on LinkedIn
Send Lynda an email
Lynda’s Professional Profile

We each spend a good deal of time in our respective life journeys simply seeking.  We seek jobs.  We seek love.  We seek comfort, convenience, compassion, and culture.  We seek happiness, contentment, and success.

Some of us are better at finding what we seek than are others.  Why? What is the secret?

Jobs & Love: Filling the Void

When I write on the topic of finding employment, I often compare it to the world of dating.  It’s an easy comparison.  In both instances, one is trying to fill a void for an essential component of the human experience:  We all need income, and we all need companionship (well, most of us do; there are rare exceptions hidden in the rocks).

For those of you who are happily married or otherwise not single or not searching, I apologize for my frequent use of the dating / job-seeking comparison.  But, because it IS a good one, we’ll stay on this train just a bit longer:

Let’s take a closer look at the similarities and perhaps learn how to improve our rate of success with both!

Technology: The Easy Way

When it comes to finding a job or a date, people flock to websites.  It’s the way it is done now that we each have computers, Blackberries, and notebooks.  There’s no getting away from it; it’s here to stay.

But, are you placing too much emphasis on the new way of doing things?  Are you relying too much on technology?

Sites like eHarmony and Match dot com boast high success rates.  Create a profile, do some online flirting, meet for a date, and you’ll find the love of your life.  Grand!  But the fact is, in spite of the undeniable success for many people, MOST people do NOT find the love of their lives online.  In fact, only 1 in 5, on average, meets his mate from a dating or social networking site.

1 in 5, people!  That’s 2 in 10; 20 in a 100; 200 in a 1000.  What about the remaining 800 people?

Where do the other 4 out of 5 find the companion with whom they choose to build a relationship?  Off line.

When you step away from the computer and venture into the physical world, you just may end up meeting the love of your life the way MOST people meet a future partner — at places like: Parks, Restaurants, Grocery stores, Bumper-to-bumper traffic, Church, Parties, Clubs, Doctor’s offices, Salons, Gyms, Tanning spas, Concerts, and so-on.

If the real world is proven to be the most successful “spot” for meeting your mate, why do so many rely on the keyboard?  Why do so few step outside of the relative security of their homes and actually do what it takes to fill the void?

The answer, I believe, is that most of us are generally lazy.  It’s EASY to hide behind a computer monitor.  It’s EASY to pretend that we are actually narrowing our choices and eliminating the bad seeds from the dating pool by scanning hundreds of dating profiles.

Easy is easy, but success is seldom ever born from it.

Effort & Its Effect

Putting yourself “out there” in the real world takes an effort.  You have to put time and attention into your appearance, for starters.  Sitting in a robe, unshaven or hair disheveled, won’t cut it.

Would you date or hire this guy?

Obviously, the extra effort involved in looking your best is not nearly as easy as not doing it.  But there’s a significant benefit inherent in going through the process of looking good:  It makes you feel good, as well.  The better you look, the better you feel.  The better you feel, the better you present yourself and are received by others.

Feeling good about your appearance as a result of making the effort to look your best directly increases your chances of success.  It’s not because “pretty people win.”  It’s because people who feel pretty (or handsome) exude confidence in a way that simply doesn’t otherwise occur.  It’s the nature of being human, and we’re all subject to it.

Of course, there’s more to it than a good-looking pair of shoes and a sweet haircut.  Once you’re step out from behind the computer looking your best, you are required to actually engage with other human beings!

The Energy of Eye Contact

Imagine the scenario:  There is a sound emanating from your mouth.  You vaguely recall that this is your voice — the external, audible voice, not the voice in your head that you otherwise spend so much time hearing.   Amazingly, that voice is speaking to someone, using full sentences!  And your eyes are looking into the eyes of another human being.  You’re not on Skype; it’s a clear view of those windows to the soul!  Simultaneously, you realize that you are reading the body language and facial expressions of this living, breathing person in front of you.

It’s, like, frickin’ wild!  Who knew that human contact could be so stimulating, given the amazing advances of computer technology? Why didn’t someone tell you sooner how much you’d enjoy life “out there” after living behind a computer for so long?

There is no substitute for it.  One-on-one human interaction just can’t be beat when it comes to gauging whether there is chemistry between two people.   That chemistry simply cannot be measured online!  And without the right chemistry, you’re not going to land the (wo)man or the job.

A Few Scenarios to Consider

Let’s say that you are enjoying a ridiculously priced cup of Joe with a friend, sitting quietly but comfortably at a coffee bar.  In walks a gorgeous specimen of a (wo)man, and you momentarily lose your brain cells.  If you were at home, online, looking at this person’s picture, it would take very little effort to click on a “wink” button or to send a smiley emoticon, right?  But, really: How many lasting relationships has that little wink created in your life?

In our little scenario, though, you are not at home.  You’re in the coffee shop — and it takes physical and emotional effort to get up off your arse and find a way to meet the person who may be THE void-filler!  It takes courage.  It takes diplomacy.  You have to pull together everything there is about you and, in a split second, capture the attention of this good lookin’ stranger.  Maybe it’s just a smile with unrelenting eye-contact.  Or perhaps you simply say, “Hi.  I’m Lynda.”  But whatever method you employ as an ice-breaker, it requires an effort.

If you DO manage to break the ice, get a name and number, you then have to follow-up.  That, too, takes an effort.  And when you meet for an actual date, you begin the process of getting to know one another.  By the end of the date, you’ll know whether a second date is warranted, and so on.  Right?

Finding a Job

Let’s now compare these principles to finding a job.

It takes very little effort to sit behind your keyboard and scroll the billions of job boards in search of that perfect employment opportunity.  You don’t have to shave, put on makeup and heels, or even brush your teeth.   You don’t have to speak to anyone.  Very little is required of you.

Easy is easy, but success is seldom ever born from it.

Putting yourself “out there,” on the other hand, takes work.  It takes courage.  It takes diplomacy, skill, and forethought.

You can send an email to a prospective Hiring Authority, attach a beautifully prepared resume’ and your best letter of recommendation — but if you don’t get out from behind the keyboard and actively DO something to engage with that person, you are lessening your chance of success.

By picking up the phone and inviting that person to meet for a cup of coffee, on the other hand, you dramatically increase your chance of landing a job.  By stopping by corporate headquarters, unannounced, leaving a printed resume’ with the receptionist, and then actually making an appointment for a sit-down meeting, you’re now miles ahead of the next best candidate who is still sitting behind his keyboard.

The Issue of Courage

As I’ve mentioned, it takes courage — in love and in employment — to put yourself out there in the real world.  You will be judged.  You will be rejected.  And it is knowing that judgment and rejection will occur that keeps most of us from doing the one thing we most need to do:  Jump in feet first without a life-saver.

Consider the Statement You Make

Look at this from the perspective of a future mate or a future employer:  How does that person perceive you?  What statement are you making by your choice in approach?

When you are behind a computer screen, the other person does not “see” you; he can only make assumptions, and those will usually be wrong.  He cannot hear your tone of voice.  He cannot draw a reasonable conclusion about your personality, character, confidence, and charisma.  Even with a Skype conference using voice and camera, there is a lack in the exchange of that imperceptible for highly important exchange of energy that occurs between people who meet in person.

How, then, is he to decide whether you are a person with whom he wants to engage in a relationship?  How is he to know whether you are worth his valuable time?  Why should he meet with you, the anonymous email person, when there IS someone else standing at the receptionist’s desk pushing for an appointment.  Or, why would he ask you on a date when there is a woman batting her eyelashes at him from the produce section at the market?

Which person would YOU most likely want to date:  The lady who sends you an email with a picture attached (real? photo-shopped? out of date?), or the attractive woman who has the courage to say “hello” as she brushes by you at the concert?  Of these two examples, which gal is most likely more outgoing, fun, and engaging?

Which person would YOU most likely want to hire:  The guy who sends you an email with a perfectly prepared resume’ attached, or the man who goes to the trouble of dressing in his best suit, driving an hour or two to your location, just to buy you a cup of coffee for an informal introductory meeting?  Of these two examples, which man is most likely the “go-getter”, the achiever, the producer?

A True Story

3 weeks ago, my lawn-mower broke.  For 3 weeks, I’ve attempted to 1) find someone to come look at it, and 2) find someone to cut my lawn in the meantime.  I’ve called a dozen people I found online, pulled business cards from bulletin boards, left my name and number, sent emails — all to no avail.

A few days ago while driving down the highway, upon passing a truck pulling a commercial size mower, I quickly dialed the number on the side of his trailer.  “Sure, I’ll come out and take a look at it tomorrow,” he promised.  And I never heard from him again.

As the grass continues to grow, having reached knee height, so has my frustration.

Then, today (I kid you not)  — half-way through writing this blog entry — I took a break to run to the post office.  On my way, I dashed into the local fuel center to grab a high-calorie, unhealthy frozen drink. (Hey, we all have our faults!)  As I was leaving, I spied a man filling up his truck at the pumps.  Attached to that truck was a lawn mower on a flat-bed.

I walked up to the man, said hello, and began to converse with him about the beautiful weather and high price of gasoline.  I then asked if he was available to come cut my lawn.  “It’s a buddy’s lawn mower,” he said.  “He just let me borrow it.  I don’t do this for a living.”  Not one to be easily swayed, I asked, “Since you don’t do it for a living, would you ever consider doing it as a kind neighborly gesture?”  I added a flirty smile to punctuate the sentence.

We continued to chat, allowing me time to explain my predicament and play upon his human empathy.  90 minutes later, my grass was cut with the promise that he’d return to cut it again in a few days.  It had gotten so tall, one cut alone did little to spruce up its appearance.  I handed him a check and he was on his way.

Before he left, however, he took a look at my broken lawn mower.  He immediately called a buddy, and that buddy said he’d come over and look at it for me later tonight.  As we casually chatted, he learned that I am an attorney and that I run a residential program for young adults.

About 10 minutes after my new friend-with-a-mower left, he returned.  I met him at the front door.  He said, “You’re an attorney, huh?”  “Yes, sir, I am.”  “I was thinking,” he started.

A few minutes later, I had a new client. And, given the size of this little town, a new client means additional referrals.  And all because I approached a guy, in person, rather than relying on the internet & email method!

What’s Your Next Move?

You’re looking for love, or searching for a job, or (like some of us) you’re seeking both.  What’s your next move?

First, evaluate what you’ve done so far:

It IS necessary to use the computer, to network online, build your web presence, establish and grow your network, and all of those various things I’ve written about in prior articles.

It IS necessary to prepare a resume’ that sells you in the best possible light, and to submit that resume’ to jobs for which you are qualified, along with a great cover letter.

It IS necessary to be active on sites like LinkedIn, to join groups, and to sign up with niche-appropriate job-board websites which update you via email on new listings.

Or, in the case of dating, those dating sites CAN be useful.  It’s only 1 in 5 who find love that way, but who’s to say you won’t be the one who is the 1 ?

So, it IS necessary to do the things that are relatively easy.  If you’ve not yet done these things, you’re behind schedule.  Get to it.

But if you’re like me — an “old pro” at the online job-seeking and/or dating challenge — it’s time to step up your game and make your next move:

• Throw the house robe in the washing machine, spruce up the hair-color, don an outfit that is fittingly attractive, and smile at your polished reflection.  You’re ready to face the world!
• Dust off the car (or find your long-forgotten subway pass) and head out into the masses.
• Pick a destination and GO: Meet a friend for a drink.  Schedule an informal coffee meeting.  Peruse the library but look as much (or more) at the other patrons as you do at the books.  Attend a free seminar or networking event.  The ideas are endless, and they ALL have the potential to lead you to finding what you seek.
• Engage in human interaction.  Say “Hello.”  Make a real connection.  Keep repeating the process until the right connection is made!

Magically, as you follow the more assertive, effort-driven route to finding what you seek, your world begins to grow.  Your network expands.  You become re-energized.  Your motivation increases.

Then, when you least expect it, you meet THE person — the one who offers the job or knows the guy who knows the gal who offers the job.  Or in the dating scene, when you least expect it, you find yourself sitting across the table from a companion who makes you swoon, someone with whom the chemistry is undeniable ….

Bottom Line

The bottom line here is simple:  Easy is easy but success is seldom ever born from it.  It takes an effort to achieve those things that are worthy of achieving.  And whether it be love or labor, you have to put yourself out there in order to make the all-important human connection that seals the deal.

GO!

~ Lynda C. Watts

About the Author
Find Lynda on LinkedIn
Send Lynda an email
Lynda’s Professional Profile

If you’ve not yet read The Start-Up, it is recommended that you do so first, then come back and join us here.  (We’ll wait…)

Welcome back!  Now that we all have the foundation upon which the questions are based, let’s dive right in:

Sunshine asks:

“. . . How do you know so much about so many different fields? I wish I had just a smidgen of your smarts. How is that you can understand other people’s motivations? I wish I had that skill. You are able to get in there and see things that just aren’t apparent to other people. How are you able to see what’s in a person’s heart?…what motivates people?…why are they doing the things they’re doing?. . . If this happened with two different companies, what was the common denominator? You were involved with both of them. What was the common theme? Do you think you might have mis-interpreted these situations?

. . . What on earth would motivate people to say such things about you? “

Let’s break those questions down into sub-topics . . .

Understanding People

Sunshine wants to know how I know what I know about people.  And I’ll do my best to answer without writing an entire nonfiction book (though I could; it’s a big topic).

I refer to myself as a behavioral specialist, or a “behaviorist” — someone who studies and understands human behavior.   I’m not a true behaviorist in the sense that I don’t subscribe to the principle that all human behaviors have a scientific explanation, but I do believe that our behavior is indicative of our feelings, thoughts, beliefs, motivation, desires, and ideals.

By closely observing behavior and accurately interpreting it, we can understand a great deal about a person.  And, an accurate level of understanding has the potential to lead to effective communication.  Effective communication leads to resolution, progression, achievement, and so forth. [See Leadership: Finding the Best, Being the Best for a discussion on the importance of behavioral analysis.]

Nearly everything we do is somehow dependent upon a relationship with another human being.  The better you are able to understand behavior, and the better able you are to communicate, theoretically at least, the better you should be at relating to others.   And though there are exceptions, for the most part this is a universally applicable theorem.

Analyzing Behavior & It’s Meaning: A Real-Life Example

CEO's Fred & Barney

Let’s look specifically at the two leaders of the start-up companies I referred to in the Start-Up article.  For clarity, we’ll call the first company — a for-profit — “ABC Co.,” and we’ll call its CEO “Fred.”  The nonprofit organization will now be known as “XYZ Org.,” lead by “Barney.”

Sunshine wants to know what the common denominator is between ABC and XYZ, as they relate to the unfortunate outcome in each scenario.  And, she’d like to know if I perhaps misinterpreted the behaviors of the leaders.  To do this, let’s look at the behavior of both Fred and Barney.

Behavior & What it Indicates

Both Fred and Barney each behaved in a way that was very likely “uncharacteristic” (I believe both of them, fundamentally, are “good” people).

For me, the question is, “Why did they behave in an uncharacteristic manner?”  What was the motivation?

To answer the question of “Why?”, we need a basic understanding of the causes of uncharacteristic behavior.

When a person acts in a manner that is uncharacteristic, it is usually the result of one of three situations:

1. Exposure to a stressor that falls outside of the person’s comfort zone;
2. The result of a lack of confidence in general, which translates to fear of and in certain situations;
3. Or, a combination of both: an unusual or unfamiliar stressor coupled with fear.

The Similarities Between Fred & Barney

Sunshine was puzzled how a bad situation could repeat itself.  As we look at the respective behaviors of Fred and Barney, it helps to have an understanding of the similarities in each situation.

Fred and Barney both:

• Exhibited a passionate dedication to their start-up businesses;
• Struggled with personal financial difficulties and lacked immediate income;
• Were solo acts in need of help from qualified professionals;
• Lacked start-up funding;
• Developed a working pitch that crossed the line of integrity.

Both Fred and Barney needed help.  To bring their ideas to fruition, each needed an initial team of qualified talent in operations, finances, IT, and communications — at a minimum.  And these folks would want salaries, salaries that neither Fred nor Barney could yet afford, and for which neither of them had ever been responsible prior to this.

At this point, both men found themselves outside of their comfort zone. The stress of solving these issues was stress unlike anything they’d experienced.  That stress — coupled with their passionate determination to see their vision to fruition — was the catalyst for the resulting uncharacteristic behavior.

The Uncharacteristic Behavior

When the truth is less than appealing . . .

Rather than attempting to solicit Board Members and a talented leadership team by providing the 100% truth and reality of their respective situations, they each s t r e c h e d the truth to bolster their credibility. They each knew — either instinctively or by way of practice — that the truth was less than appealing and would likely lead to rejection.

When it came to funding and Board Membership, each man manipulated the facts to paint an enticing picture — but that picture wasn’t real.  And in each case, it took time to determine fact from fiction.

FUNDING

They each realized that in order to attract the talent they needed, they’d have to be able to promise an enticing compensation package within the immediate future.  Without that enticement, it was unlikely that anyone would be interested in providing the sweat-equity needed to get the businesses launched.

Sweat-equity employment means that an individual works for the promise of future payment.  It’s a simple ROI concept:  For the investment of one’s time, there will ultimately be a financial payoff that is large enough for one to take the risk involved with a sweat-equity arrangement.

Fred and Barney both exaggerated the truth of their funding situation.   Fred’s approach was to outright lie about the status of contracts he had with what he referred to as “partners.”  Barney’s approach was to simply delay providing the information — information which, it turned out, didn’t exist.

GOVERNANCE

In addition to exaggerating the truth or lying about funding, Fred and Barney also crossed the line (behaved uncharacteristically) when it came to what they each referred to as their “Board of Directors”and/or people who were “with” the business.

Using their respective sales pitches which each included enticing funding explanations, Fred and Barney began dialogues with VIPs they found primarily via LinkedIn.  Then, regardless of the outcome of those dialogues, the person they spoke with was added to their respective list of people “with” the company or “on” the Board of Directors.

Name Dropping No-No

For example, Barney sent an email to Kathleen Kennedy (yes, THE Kathleen Kennedy) to introduce his 501(c)(3) and its mission.  He did not receive a reply, not surprisingly. However, he then began to use her name — one of many — to bolster his credibility.  Rather than saying, “I sent an email to K.K. but have not heard back from her,” he  indicated that Kathleen Kennedy’s position on the board was “pending” and that he “expected to hear something soon.”

Fred’s Story: The Specifics

When Fred presented his pitch to me, he intended (and succeeded) to leave the impression that his company had Billions of dollars worth of projects “in the pipeline,” a phrase he repeatedly used.  In his initial emails to me, he said:

I’m launching a global enterprise right now. . . .  Doing this on a shoestring budget but have serious relationships with leaders of governments and Fortune 500 companies. We should be able to generate serious and permanent cash flow within the next 90 days.

We have people in [another country] right now ready to close business on several deals.  We have several billion dollars in capital projects in the pipeline right now.

His business concept was intriguing.  I could visualize and understand his vision, and I could see the potential.  But, I wasn’t in a position to provide sweat-equity indefinitely.  Given his projection of a 90-day window for a ROI in the millions, and having been offered a to-be-determined percentage of ownership along with the title of President, COO, and Board Member, it was an opportunity worthy of further pursuit.

But, I needed to verify everything he was telling me.  And that took time.  A LOT of time.

I entered into an “Interim Agreement” to protect myself while I vetted the entire operation.  Fred sent me hundreds of emails, countless documents to review, and a lengthy list of people who he indicated as being “with” ABC Co.

As it turned out, all of these impressive people who were “with” the company were in fact NOT associated.  Though Fred engaged them each in a dialogue regarding his ideas, and while he proposed their involvement at the executive level, no one had yet agreed.  No one signed a contract.  No one was committed.

As I continued to vet the company and unravel the facts, I provided hundreds of hours of work-product — everything from simply reading the information Fred continued to send to me, to the drafting of contracts and white papers.  And, I spent countless hours on the telephone and on Skype, talking to all those people Fred said were “with” the company. After all, I was now Fred’s business partner.  We had a signed agreement declaring it.  It was no longer just Fred’s business; it was now also partially mine.

From my perspective, my time was a worthwhile investment.  Even if the company wasn’t as close to realizing capital gains anytime soon, I still believed in the vision.  I could still see the potential for substantial income.

But, I’d lost faith in Fred.  Those contracts he said that were “in negotiation” did not yet exist.  He needed me to write them.  The “serious relationships” with “leaders of government and Fortune 500 companies” likewise did not exist.  At best, he had a contact who had a contact with a governmental leader and a Fortune 500 company — in the singular, not the plural — and certainly nothing that even came close to being characterized as a “serious” relationship.

As the picture became clearer, and as I learned the truth, I began to push Fred for an employment agreement that went from “Interim” to “Final”.  I was providing an awful lot of work and pushing his company closer to launch, but I didn’t yet have a definitive agreement regarding my percentage of ownership or salary, other than an agreement that it would be consistent with “industry standard”.

Each time I said, “We need to reach an agreement,” Fred found a reason to delay.  Finally, after weeks of singing my praises, he said, “This isn’t going to work.” And even though we never reached an agreement as to the percentage of my ownership, unarguably Fred maintained the controlling share.  When he severed ties, he did so with legal authority in spite of the lack of character it demonstrated.

And that was that.

I sent him a bill for my time, based on the industry standard hourly rate for someone in my position (which, of course, he’s not yet paid), and added the experience to the list of “lessons learned.”

Barney’s Story: The Specifics

After my experience with Fred, my approach with Barney was much more skeptical.  I questioned everything and promised nothing.  Under no circumstance was I going to begin providing work-product until I was certain of the real picture, not the picture Barney painted.  As a result, I spent far less time and energy unveiling the truth.

When he contacted me initially, his pitch went something like this:

This is a first-of-its-kind nonprofit that will benefit the teachers around the world and change the future of education.  We have a lot of great leaders on board, and we have celebrity contacts who will streamline fundraising.  We can’t pay salaries yet, but we will be able to begin payroll when we launch next month.

Having spent a good deal of time looking for a leadership role with a nonprofit, and now facing an opportunity to lead an organization with a mission about which I am passionate, and being told that funding would be available within a month’s time, I was certainly interested.  But, again, I needed to verify everything first.

When I inquired about the source of funding that he said would be available “next month,” Barney provided a 3-stage fund-raising strategy that included corporate sponsorship, celebrity sponsorship, and employee contributions.  When I asked for the specifics of his  sponsorship plans, he provided several explanations including the following:

[For Corporate Sponsorship]  At the register each cashier will have a button that read ” Ask how you can help to support our teachers?” That person chooses to add $5 or $10 to their bill and in return they will receive a pamphlet for [our organization]. This will show them in more details about us and how they will be able to go on line to join our mission. The percentage of people that will do this is 30%- 35% of all donors.

10,000 pamphlets x $10 each donation received = $100,000 so every 3 days all of the pamphlets will be gone. The 4 months the number of 10,000 boxed pamphlets are 41 times. This equals to 4.1 million a yr from each (1) company but each company we contracted for 50 stores, this equals to 205,000,000. Subtract 10% for recurring visitors and other reasons equals 184,500,000. This number times the three year contract is 553,500,000. Now you take this number and multiply it by the 50 stores 9,225,000,000 in one year; our three year contract 27,675,000,000. . . .

[For Employee Contributions] This number comes out to 3.4 million employees: 1/4 of this will be employees donating $25 a month for 12 months =850,000 employees=$21,250,000
3/4 of this will be employees donating $20 a month for 12
months=2,550,000 employees=$51,000,000.  This totals to $72,250,000 a month; $867,000,000 a year;
$2,601,000,000 in 3 yrs; $4,335,000,000 in 5 yrs

Ignoring his obvious struggle with English composition and the likelihood that he was not formally educated — something I tried to overlook and not allow to bias me — the obvious questions were, “How did you determine the percentages?” and “What data supports your estimations?” Rather than providing a direct answer, he replied, “I will explain it to you and it will amaze you.”

I waited to be amazed.

As I waited for something that would never materialize, I continued to unravel all that I’d been told.  In doing so, I discovered a number of very serious issues with the potential to cause very serious problems for the organization, both legally and with the media.  I advised Barney at every step, and watched as his attitude toward me took a turn for the worse.  Hearing that his funding ideas were fundamentally flawed, that his calculations were based on presumptions and wishes rather than factual data (and therefore not viable), and that his choice for the name for the organization was a trademark violation, Mr. Barney decided to blame the messenger.

Some people simply can’t deal with the truth.  And if you don’t want to hear the truth, don’t ask me to provide an analysis.

I created a “Directory” of names and contact information for all of the people Barney said were on his Board of Directors.  I began contacting them, explaining my position, and discovering where each person stood with regard to the nonprofit.  Across the board, I kept hearing, “I spoke with Barney once or twice, but I never agreed to be on the Board.”

Deja vu.

The red flags were now overwhelming, and it was time for me to remove this organization from my list of potential employers.  I’d spent a week vetting the organization.

Knowing that it was likely that Barney was now also using MY name amongst his list of “Board Members” and even perhaps going so far as to call me the President of XYZ, I needed to protect myself from liability.  And, I felt obligated to share with the “board” all that I learned while vetting the organization.  I sent an email to everyone.

In that email, I provided a gratuitous summary of the actual status of the nonprofit, outlined the immediate problems and provided a solution for each of them, and I announced a position statement regarding myself.  Basically I said, “There are x number of serious problems.  To solve the problems, xx needs to be achieved. And, unless or until Barney agrees to address these problems, I will not accept a position with XYZ, nor will I provide any further advisory opinions.”

I concluded the email by saying:

I continue to be impressed with [Barney's] passion and dedication, and his apparent willingness to learn.  He seems to be a very genuine, compassionate person and I have absolutely nothing negative to say about him as an individual.  I do believe he is in-over-his-head right now, and he can use all of the support that any of you are willing and able to give.  I am, unfortunately, not in a position to donate any more time and talent, but I do genuinely want to see [him] succeed with his mission.

Barney’s response was to begin an email defamation campaign.

Sunshine asked, “What … would motivate people to say such things about you?”  It’s simple, really:  Pride.

Barney reacted emotionally, not with business sense.   I provided a black and white portrait to replace his fantasy — and it angered him.  He set out to save face, or at least try to, with the many people he’d tried to engage and employ.  He was perhaps embarrassed, as well.  Whenever a leader reacts emotionally to something he perceives as a negative, he risks behaving unprofessionally.  And that’s what happened here.

In Fred’s case, the limited amount of defamation of which I was aware was also the result of reacting emotionally.  I received several reports of comments he made, and most of it was petty, and none of it was believable.  But, importantly, he ultimately STOPPED the behavior that I’d pointed out to him was unethical — at least insofar as public statements are concerned.  He rephrased his pitch which, though still misleading, now borders more tightly on truth than fiction.  Unfortunately, his change of behavior was at my expense.

The Silver Lining

In each situation, I received a good deal of support from the various “board members” and “partners” who appreciated knowing the truth.  Being the first person to take the time to unravel the facts, the appreciation for my efforts was overwhelming.

In fact, I made some excellent friends and contacts, people who remain a daily presence in my life.  And, I expanded my network to include professionals with whom I otherwise would likely never have crossed paths.

The Nutshell

It would be nice to say that my experiences with Fred and Barney were unique, that this sort of thing is rare.  It is not.  Aside from the email I’ve received with similar horror stories, there is a plethora of information about this type of thing on the internet.  It happens.  My intention with the original Start-Up article and with this Follow-Up is simply to high-light an existing problem along with the warning signs with the hope that fewer people fall victim to it.

With so many people looking for jobs, many of us are considering options that we might otherwise ignore.  A Start-Up Company is one such opportunity.  As I said in the first article, there ARE legitimate start-ups out there with legitimate opportunities.  If you’re considering joining a start-up, you simply need to be cautious.

My life experiences, and my independent studies, have taught me a great deal about people and what makes us tick.  As a result, I tend to be overly understanding — a character flaw that needs some adjustment on my part.

As the red flags began to wave with Fred and Barney, I understood how each person got himself into the situation.  It made sense to me. Focusing on the genuine potential of each business concept rather than the lack of leadership ability and integrity on the part of the CEO’s, I thought perhaps I could salvage the situation.

And though I didn’t nor wouldn’t ever condone a lack of integrity such as was exhibited by Fred and Barney, my ability to understand how and why they crossed the line resulted in me sticking around a day or so longer than most.

My mistake was that I didn’t immediately place enough importance on the integrity and leadership factors.  When a founder of a start-up lacks the ability to remain true to his principles when he finds himself outside of his comfort zone, s/he is not someone with whom I want to be associated.  S/he will perhaps succeed in the mission of the business, but it will likely be at the expense of someone or something important:  personal character, business reputation, employee relations, product safety, and so on.

It’s easy to come up with a business idea, register with the state, and slap oneself with the CEO label.  But it’s not so easy to sell someone on your idea when you have nothing but a promise to offer in return.  And the value of the promise will plummet to an irretrievable depth if the CEO lacks integrity.

And even when a CEO does not lack integrity — when s/he has a moral compass that is as accurate as possible — it does not mean that s/he also possesses the experience, skill, and talent needed to be a leader.  Fred and Barney both lacked the skill to lead, and they lacked the humility to hire a CEO who was qualified.

One Last Q&A

One of my readers asked if I perhaps made a mistake in trusting these gentleman.  Especially as it concerned Barney — having just been burned by Fred — my reader asked, “Didn’t you learn the first time around?”

If seeing the truth were only this easy!

Here is the thing about trust:  You either do it, or you don’t.  There are those who trust someone until or unless they prove themselves untrustworthy.  And there are others who are distrustful until or unless one proves himself to be trustworthy.

My approach falls somewhere between these two extremes.  I am cautiously optimistic.  I work from the premise that a person is trustworthy while I set out to prove to myself that I am not mistaken in that belief.

As with Fred and Barney, my efforts to unveil the truth showed me that neither man could be trusted, sadly.  As a result, their unprofessional behavior after I parted ways with each of them was no longer uncharacteristic.  It was perfectly aligned with the type of business professional they proved to be.

I am not naive.  I know there are plenty of trustworthy, character-driven professionals with whom I would be honored to be associated.  It’s sorting through the bad to find the good that is the challenge.  The bottom line is that one won’t ever find the winner in the group if s/he doesn’t take a risk.  Carefully.

~Lynda C. Watts

About the Author
Find Lynda on LinkedIn
Send Lynda an email
Lynda’s Professional Profile

A NOTE ABOUT COMMENTS:  Your comments and discussion participation — regardless of your point of view — are encouraged and appreciated.  Posts which appear to be legitimately intended to add to or comment on the content of an article are always approved. All spam, however, is deleted by WordPress without consideration by the author.  Attempts by one person to comment as many different people using multiple email accounts will automatically be marked as spam.

What do you want to be when you grow up?  Do you wear so many hats that their cumulative weight obstructs your true identity?

Your various life pursuits — such as finding a job or making a career change — will best lead to personal happiness if you keep them aligned with your life’s purpose.  It’s just a matter of knowing what that purpose is, and pursuing it.

Sounds simple, right?

But what about folks, like myself, who are genuinely passionate about and qualified for MANY pursuits?  When there are many, many things that float your boat, how do you decide which body of water into which you will launch your ship?

Some would say, “Why impose a limit? Sail the 7 seas!”  In fact, this has pretty much been my philosophy during my entire life:  If I’m interested, I pursue it.  If I’m passionate about it, I pursue it with a vengeance.

In the business world, I’m known as a generalist.  I’ve written about the considerations regarding a generalist vs. a specialist in terms of the best hire for a job.  And if every hiring authority would read that article and agree with it, there’d be no reason for this article.  But, that’s not going to happen.

What’s a Generalist To Do?

If we are the sum total of our parts, then who am I, exactly?

My résumé reads as if it incorporates half a dozen people rather than one:  A litigation and communications expert, humanitarian, behaviorist, author, founder, Vice President, Managing Partner, Director, General Contractor, Corporate Consultant, speaker, life coach, mentor, volunteer, cake decorating CEO who is experienced in the legal, medical, construction, internet, publishing, and philanthropic industries?  I mean — it just looks and sounds unreal. (Okay … I don’t actually include cake decorating on my résumé, but it is something that has produced income over the years.)

How in the world is a recruitment professional or a hiring authority supposed to read my credentials and, in spite of a highly organized and well written résumé, sort through it all in such a way that s/he can conclude that I am qualified for the position?

The Issue, Under a Microscope

The Scenario: Let’s say that I am attempting to obtain a job as the COO of a humanitarian nonprofit.  The position requires executive-level management experience for a budget of at least 2 million.  After exhausting all efforts to establish a direct connection with the CEO or Board of Directors, I send a great cover-letter and my credentials package, making sure to follow all of the submission requirements, and tailoring my letter to the needs of the employer.

Employer Perspective: As the hiring authority begins to read my complex, non-traditional, multi-industry experience, s/he thinks, “Why in the hell is this person applying for this job?”  And, before turning to Page 3, my carefully prepared documents hit the shredder, or the delete key is quickly activated.

Making Sense of it All ?

Candidate Perspective: When I send in my résumé, I am thinking, “I’m a successful leader who has managed a large budget and has dedicated 13+ years to humanitarian concerns.  Perfect!”  I know that the skills required of me as the VP of a law firm easily transfer to the needed skills for running a nonprofit.  I think, “Big budget management, as required in the construction industry, easily transfers to big budget management for the particular nonprofit.”  I also know that my achievements with leading various other programs to #1 world-wide status or maintaining a 95% success rate in spite of a small budget requires skills that easily translate to the needs of a nonprofit leadership role.”  And so on.

Skills are skills.

But, my ability to connect the dots does not translate to the hiring authority’s ability to do the same.  They simply have too many résumés to evaluate, a stack that will inevitably include the experience of someone else who can say, “I’ve been the COO of a nonprofit for the immediate past 8 years, operating a 10 million dollar budget.”  And regardless of whether I would do a better job than this other person who may have spent his entire career performing at a mediocre level, at best, he reads better on paper.  Thus, I am passed over for positions which are perfectly suited to my skill-set.

What’s My Problem?

I often review and critique résumés for clients, and I am often hired to revise those documents.  And though I get excellent feedback such as, “I finally got a job using the résumé you wrote for me,” I am far less talented when it comes to my own document.  Thus, I sought and received the opinions from several executive-level professionals on how I can improve my résumé.

In a nutshell, they each gave me essentially the same advice.  Along with comments like, “It’s hard to tell what it is that you’re offering,” and “Try to make it shorter,” they each said, emphatically:

Narrow your focus.

Easier said than done, my friends.  Easier said than done.

Narrowing the Focus

I’ve spent many a sleepless night lately trying to narrow my focus.  Just when I think I know what I want to be when I grow up, something else tickles my fancy and I think, “Well, maybe it would be better if I [insert one of a number of verbs here].”

Do you know those people who just seem to be really good at whatever they do, no matter what it is?  Didn’t we all know kids like that back in high school, the one who seemed to join every club, win every award, take home straight A’s each quarter, and date the prettiest girl / cutest boy?

Well, I’d like to say, “That was me,” but it wasn’t — not by a long-shot.  However, as an adult, I can fairly say that I have a bit of a green thumb when it comes to business.  Regardless of the venture, I do quite well.  Granted, it takes a lot of hard work — but I succeed because of my commitment and passion, and my communications skills.  It’s a winning combination.  Yet, I’m failing miserably in my attempt to narrow my focus.

Oddly enough, I’m the type of person who excels when it comes to making decisions.  It’s one reason I excel in leadership roles.  But alas, I, too, am human and, as such, I have flaws.  Deciding on a narrow focus is proving to be exceedingly difficult.

I’ve made lists.  I’ve created charts.  I’ve journaled.  I’ve brainstormed with friends.  And still, I find myself unable to combine all of my skills and interests (or abandon some) and meld them into ONE specific, clearly defined specialty.

Yesterday, in a meeting with a V.I.P. who presented to me an outstanding proposal, the issue of a narrowed focus became paramount to that proposal.  In other words, if I can narrow my focus — decide upon just one thing at which I am or become expert — he could very easily become the catalyst for my future success.

As if finding an immediate source of reasonable income weren’t sufficient motivation, I now was presented with an even greater reason to bite the bullet and make a decision.  But, how?

The Solution: Playing Games

For me, the process of narrowing my passionate interests is equivalent to forcing me to make a choice between my children!  “Sorry, but you can only pick one. Just do it!”  It’s impossible!  But, it is also time to overcome the impossible with regard to my life’s pursuit.

So, I devised a mind-game which just might trick me into reaching the critical decision I don’t otherwise seem capable of making.

Much like the philosophical debate about how to choose which person to throw out of a sinking boat, I set to the task of playing the game.

The game goes sort of like this:

I have been given 5 millions dollars.  But, I can’t spend it just any ol’ way.  My use of the money is conditioned upon my selecting a cause, and spending every penny of it on that one and only venture.  One cause.  One venture.  Only one, regardless of what that “one” happens to be.

How will I spend the money?

The answer to the question becomes my narrowed focus.  The game forces me to appreciate the ONE thing about which I am most passionate, even if I’ve yet to recognize it.

As I play the game, I’m back to making lists — but this time I have a mission around which I can wrap my mind, that seems “less impossible.”  This time, the decision I make is no longer just about what I want or don’t want.  This time, I have the duty to carefully select which item on the list will get the $5 million dollars — money I sure don’t want to waste, right?

And the Winner Is …

You’ll have to stay tuned.  When I know, I’ll let YOU know!

~ Lynda C. Watts

About the Author
Find Lynda on LinkedIn
Send Lynda an email
Lynda’s Professional Profile

Are you considering a position with a start-up? If so, you are urged to read this first!

With the difficulties faced in the job market, it might be tempting to consider joining a start-up company or organization.  After all, the founders are often eager for talented executives willing to work for less — at least initially — when promised a generous compensation package at the end of the first year — or whatever creative scenario they propose.

What is a “start-up,” you ask?

(My mother asked, so I thought it best to add a definition; I do not mean to insult your intelligence).  The phrase “start-up company” became popular during the dot com explosion of the 90′s and typically was limited to a high-tech company. That definition is now expanded to refer to any new business venture which has not yet opened its “doors,” whether virtual or physical.  At any point between the decision to move forward with one’s conception of the idea and the official launch, a new company falls into the “start-up” category.  Nowadays, most start-ups are virtual; they begin on the computer with the launching of a website, regardless of whether there is a physical location commonly referred to as “headquarters.”

Start-ups may also include those businesses in the physical world, those with actual doors, isles, shelves, desks, water fountains, and a cash register:  A new mom-and-pop restaurant; yet another retail store; a lawyer who hangs his or her own shingle.  In those instances, the “grand opening” of the physical store/office tends to correspond to the launching of a website, and so on.

The 7 Basic Stages Involved in a Start-Up

1. Conception. A start-up starts with an idea.  The founder has a light-bulb moment, or the idea evolves slowly over time.  Either way, the conception of the idea is the first step.  The person who conceives of the idea is known as the “founder” (usually).

2. Decisive Action.  Countless folks have ideas, good or bad. In fact, 70% of Americans dream of opening their own business.  But few take the idea and run with it.  The 2nd step, then, is to decide whether or not to pursue one’s business idea.  If the answer is “no,” it’s all over.  But, when the decision is “yes,” the process moves forward at whatever pace a founder chooses.

3. Planning.  During this critical stage, the founder sets to paper all of his ideas.  He creates a written business plan, or hires someone to write it for him.  The creation of the business plan requires in-depth consideration, planning, analysis, and research regarding every aspect of the new business, from its name and legal structure to a detailed cost analysis.

4.  Funding / Capital.  After a business plan is perfected, the founder now needs to find funding for his business (unless, of course, he’s independently wealthy).  Without start-up capital, there is no source of fuel for the propulsion needed by a start-up.  In most instances, it costs “a lot” to get a new business launched.  A new restaurant may cost 1M+, depending on its location, due to the expense of equipment.  A service-oriented website, on the other hand, could cost very little, with initial expenses limited to registration fees.

Whether grants are sought or a fundraiser is planned — such as for new nonprofits, aka “501(c)(3)” — or investors solicited, a founder might want to bring in a CFO (or someone with financial expertise, in general) to assist at this stage.  Venture capital, angel capital, and grants are not easy to obtain.

Also, funding is often approached in stages, especially for high-growth businesses.  Rather than a large investment of all the capital required to get through the first year, for example, a founder can expect to solicit funding multiple times, proving himself along the way. His investors will expect to see consistent and positive growth and development.  As this (hopefully) occurs, investors continue their periodic infusion of funding.  This process can take years.

5.  Recruitment.  Having a brilliant business plan and funding, the founder now seeks to find talent to help bring his vision to fruition.  Depending on the needs of the company and its legal status, it may be necessary to first and foremost find a President and Secretary/Treasurer to meet legal requirements. And when the business requires a Board of Directors, the founder typically sets out to fill that Board right away.

6.  Action.  With plans articulated, funding available, and initial personnel / Board Members to assist and advise, the founder and his team now set into action all that is required to launch the new business.  Depending on the level of complexity, the launch could take place within days, or it could take up to a year or longer as in the case of complex new technologies or industries which are subject to complex laws and regulations.

7.  Launch.  When the day finally arrives to “cut the ribbon,” and the champagne is flowing, your start-up — no longer an infant — enters its next stage of growth and becomes a new business.

[For a dramatically more detailed description of the stages involved in a start-up, you might enjoy this website dedicated to the topic.  It's good.]

Now that you know the definition of a start-up, and now that you have an understanding of the basic steps involved, it’s time to consider the good, the bad, and the ugly of joining a business or organization during its start-up phase.

THE GOOD

1.  COMPETITION FACTOR: With start-ups, there is less competition for the vacancy a founder first needs to fill.  Often, there is NO competition.  In fact, you may be solicited by the founder via a social network.  Seldom is there an HR department to do the recruiting. You may receive a message on LinkedIn, for example, that says something to the effect of, “Great profile! Let’s talk.  I may have a position of interest to you.”  A quick look at the sender’s profile which likely identifies him as the “CEO” is initially exciting and very enticing.

2.  CAREER ADVANCEMENT: A founder often finds himself overwhelmed, confused, and desperate for help, especially during Stages 3-5.  As a result, he is not picky (or even recklessly indiscriminate) about who he brings on board — so long as he has help.

The benefit to the job seeker is the potential for rapid career advancement, such as jumping from a Divisional Manager or other mid-level position with a current or most-recent employer to a COO or other high-level executive with the start-up.  It’s an enticing proposition which many find hard to resist.

3.  INCOME POTENTIAL: Getting in on the ground floor of a start-up with exciting profit potential, being able to have a significant influence on its direction and growth, is an enticing challenge most ambitious professionals find hard to ignore.  The founder may use the following argument:

If you’d been offered a position with Microsoft or Google when it was in its infancy, can you imagine how much you’d regret it if you walked away from the opportunity?

Undeniably, there are start-ups with extraordinary potential — and you are being offered a position in the initial phase!  And when that offer includes a percentage of ownership — a frequent recruitment method, especially when initial funding is limited — you recognize the potential value to your bank account.  After all, what if this start-up is as successful as Facebook?  You quickly calculate a 2% ownership of a current industry leader, and you’re dizzy with dollars.  It’s hard to get the “What if…” concept out of your mind as you envision what could be a future Fortune 500 — one which is currently begging for your assistance.

A Real Life Example: Twice this year, I’ve been personally recruited via LinkedIn by the “CEO’s” of their respective start-up companies.  One was a for-profit, and the other was a non-profit.

The for-profit offered me partial ownership, the COO and CCO spots, and a seat on the Board.  His pitch included the statement that there was “1.5 Billion in the pipeline” from existing contracts and contracts in negotiation.  He provided a list of names of people with truly impressive profiles and credentials, identifying them as being “with” his company.  A truly seductive job offer, right?  How does one walk away from that?

The second start-up, a nonprofit, offered me the President’s seat, a salary of $260,000 for the first 6 months, followed by a salary increase to $520,000, plus a seat on the Board of Directors.  Just like the for-profit start-up, his pitch included an impressive list of people who he said were “on the Board of Directors,” and he stated that the foundation would have 11 Million in donations by years’ end.  Again, a truly enticing offer from which one would be crazy to walk away, right?

IF, in each real-life example, the CEO had provided true and accurate information, THEN and only then would all of the “positive” parameters have fallen into place.  The problem was that neither founder was honest.

Still, a start-up can provide you with the opportunity for a high-level position for which you have few (or no) competitors who seek the same vacancy, and the potential for some serious income — especially if you are offered a slice of the ownership pie.  It’s time to look at why it might be best to pass up the seemingly perfect job offer.

THE BAD

1.  UNKNOWNS CREATE HIGH RISK: Unlike a job offer from an established business, a start-up has not yet developed a history.  There are no historical markers to analyze.  There are no employees, or very few employees, with whom you can chat-up and uncover the dirt that may exist.  And, unless the founder has a proven track record as an entrepreneur, it’s tough to know how well he can lead the new business into a profitable enterprise.  In other words, the risk is high.

2. FAILURE FACTOR: Have you ever considered why so many start-ups fail in spite of brilliant ideas and sufficient funding?  A new business is set up for failure when the ego of the founder gets in the way of the achievement of the mission.

When the founder names himself as CEO as well as Chairman of the Board, for example, his title is known as “Executive Chairman.”  To be an Executive Chairman takes much, much more than most founding mothers or fathers actually possess.  And while there is little room for argument that the founder should maintain the Chairman seat, the role of CEO is altogether different.  Particularly with regard to high-growth and/or complex corporations, a CEO absolutely must have the skills and experience needed to lead the company.

Because a founder often does not possess the humility he needs to separate his love and passion for his business from the question of his ability to actually lead the operation, he sets himself up for failure.  Rather than being smart enough to say, “I need to hire an experienced CEO who knows how to run this thing,” he gets in his own way and insists, “I have to be the CEO because I have to control the ride.  It’s my baby.  It’s my vision.  No one else can be in the driver’s seat.”

Thus, if you’ve chosen to ride in the passenger seat with an untrained and inexperienced driver, you are now at risk for injury in the inevitable crash.

It takes intelligence, humility, and above all else, a passionate dedication to the mission, to step aside and let an expert do what needs to be done.  Far too many founders lack these qualities, sadly, a great ideas turn into nothing but a memory.

Real life example:  Remember the non-profit I mentioned above?  This particular start-up was conceived by a passionate, dedicated, and ambitious Executive Chairman who had a decent idea for helping public schools.  In spite of the fact that there are a plethora of similar foundations with the same mission, I was initially intrigued by the founder’s unquestionable passion for the cause (and, his pitch, as set out above).  However, as I did my due-diligence to properly investigate all that needed to be explored, I discovered that this “Executive Chairman” dropped out of college in favor of stocking produce for his local grocery store.  That, plus a bit of carpentry experience, made up the bulk of his work history.

In spite of his background, I hoped this founder possessed enough sense to hire a CEO to run his nonprofit.  I advised him (and the folks he said were his Board of Directors) of several critical issues impeding the future success of the organization:  1)  The name of the organization was a trademark violation, and 2) if the foundation did succeed in raising the billions of dollars claimed by its founder, the public would crucify the new organization when it learned of the CEO’s lack of qualifying experience.  My acceptance of the Presidency was conditioned, therefore, upon a name change and upon the founder’s agreement to step aside as CEO. Given that I am not employed by this start-up, it’s easy to figure out that my advice was ignored by the produce department.

3.  DESPERATE MEASURES: One of the benefits I mentioned was a lack of competition due to the founder’s state of desperation to find a willing body to help with an overwhelming amount of work.  However, that same desperation is a negative.  It has the potential to lead to desperate measures. In desperate need of help, a founder may feel it’s necessary to paint a picture that is less than accurate so that the target of his solicitation is more easily seduced.  In fact, it happens far too often.

For that reason, anyone who is considering joining a start-up must absolutely, positively, unfailingly do his due-diligence to check out everything he is being told.  Specifically, pay very close attention to the following:

Lying about Body of Support: Name-dropping is a common tactic, and one of the easier facts to check.  If the founder identifies Kathleen Kennedy or Michelle Obama amongst the Board of Directors, you might be impressed — but you must be skeptical.  Chances are, it’s a lie.  Frankly, most founders won’t go that far in their distortion of the truth (in spite of my recent experience).  Most will drop names of lesser known but still highly qualified, impressive people.

Whatever the case, pick up the phone and call those people directly.  Simply say, “I’ve been asked to consider joining this company, and the founder indicated that you have agreed to be on the Board of Directors.”  You’ll either get a raving recommendation, or the person will reply in the negative, saying something like, “Hmm. That’s odd.  I spoke with him 6 months ago, but I never agreed to be on the Board…”

If a negative response happens once, perhaps it is a legitimate misunderstanding.  But when you get the same negative response from 2 or more “Board Members,” it’s time to run away.  The red-flags couldn’t be more obvious.

Lying about Funding: Until a start-up is funded, it won’t get very far.  Chances are, there will be a certain period of time in which it is impossible to receive a paycheck.  The founder hopes that you will provide “sweat-equity” — your work, for free, with the promise of future payment.  And sweat-equity CAN be a good investment.  If you’re sitting on an opportunity akin to the start-up phase of AIG or Hewlett-Packard, a few months of sweat-equity will be rewarded many times over.

However, for some idiotic reason, founders find themselves misrepresenting the true nature of the state of funding when trying to solicit you for a sweat-equity agreement.  Perhaps they’ve been turned down by too many other people who won’t even consider a sweat-equity arrangement, and decide that adding a little spice to the reality of the situation might provide better results.

In their pitch, they say things like, “There is $1.5 billion in the pipeline,” or “Your salary will begin in 30 days at a rate of $260,00, and it will then double thereafter.”  It would be foolish to walk away from that much funding!  But, only if the funding is REAL — and it’s your job to find out before making your decision.

Real Life Example: In the examples I’ve used so far, about the for-profit and the non-profit, both founders blatantly lied to me about their source of funding.  In the first instance, I was told that all these big bucks “in the pipeline” were calculated on the basis of existing contracts, and contracts currently being negotiated.  I asked to see the contracts.  They didn’t exist.

In the second instance, I was asked to provide approximately 1 month’s worth of sweat-equity, to be followed by an exceptional salary for a start-up.  It took 2 weeks to pull from the founder the truth about funding:  There wasn’t any, and there sure as hell wouldn’t be any within a month’s time!

Thus, having shown their respective true colors and failed the integrity test, further consideration of either of these start-ups was completely out of the question EVEN IF they suddenly found a magical source of funding.  To knowingly work for and with someone who lacks integrity is a career killer.

THE UGLY

What Do you Have to Lose?

1.  TIME: During the process of vetting a start-up, you will have no choice but to invest considerable time, without compensation.  It’s unavoidable, unless you hire someone to do the bulk of the work for you.  It takes a lot of time to contact the people listed as being “with” the start-up and/or on the Board of Directors.  It takes time to do a search with the secretary of state.  It takes time to obtain and read contracts.  And so on.  A LOT of time — perhaps 40 hours or more.  And if you are a kind, compassionate human being, you might find yourself providing free work along the way.

Real Life Example: While vetting an organization, I received dozens of emails from the founder who intended to engage in name-dropping.  It was laborious trying to keep track of all of these people and their contact information.  Thus, I created a “Member Directory,” primarily to make it more convenient for me to follow-up with each person.  When the hyper-linked, professional, very useful document was complete, I provided it to the founder for free.  Market value? About $700.00.  Of course, I did not yet know that he’d been lying to me.  If I had, my natural tendency to be generous would never have kicked in gear.

2.  MONEY: Obviously, if you hire someone to do the vetting, you are out-of-pocket for whatever those expenses might be. But there is also the amount of money you are not otherwise earning because of the time you must invest to check things out thoroughly.  And don’t overlook international phone bills which you might also incur, as in the case of contacting Board Members from the U.K., Australia, or (God-forbid) Nigeria.

3.  OPPORTUNITY: If you spend two weeks vetting a start-up, there’s no telling how many opportunities you are losing by turning your attention away from either your current job, or your job search.

4.  REPUTATION: To me, there is nothing more important (in business) than my reputation.  To put that reputation at risk is something which is exceedingly difficult for me to do, personally.  In fact, I avoid it at all costs.  This means that my vetting process is extensive.  During the process, I am typically on good terms with whomever it is that I am vetting.  I give them the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.  But if and when I do learn that this person lacks integrity, that I have been lied to, and that others are likewise being lied to, I do not hesitate to step up and say, in a way that is more diplomatic, “Hey, this is uncool.”

And, guaranteed, the moment a person is called out for his lack of integrity, he will immediately set out to save face.  That means he will actively engage in defamation of your character.

Real Life Example: When I pulled out of the non-profit after discovering the layers of lies that were used to entice me to waste my time, money, and an unknown number of opportunities, I submitted a letter expressing to the Executive Chairman and the Board of Directors my final decision and the reason for that decision.  Within less than 2 minutes, the founder began circulating an email that referred to me as a money-hungry, undermining liar who did not have the best interest of the organization in mind.

When an email like that is circulated to approximately 30 business professionals with impressive credentials, one of two things will happen:  They will either believe it, or they won’t.  Luckily, in my case, most saw the true colors of the founder and my reputation was spared.  Unfortunately, though, at least one person jumped on the defaming band-wagon.  As it was limited to email, I stopped short of filing defamation charges — but now I must periodically check the world-wide web to make sure that the libelous comments are not made public.  Frankly, it’s a burden I’d rather not have.

5.  RISK / LIABILITY: In some situations, you might be setting yourself up for personal liability or the assumption of certain risks you don’t intend to undertake.  For example, if you begin to provide sweat-equity during the time period needed for the vetting process, or if the founder adds your name amongst those who he repeatedly uses to solicit others such that it appears to others that you are “with” the corporation, you might find yourself liable if you don’t make it otherwise clear to all involved.

The problem, of course, is that you likely will not know all who are involved or to whom your name is being submitted.

The Bottom Line

Does all of this mean that you should avoid start-ups altogether?  Not necessarily.

There ARE some good start-ups out there, with talented, smart, and savvy founders.  All businesses have to start somewhere, right?  Especially in this economy, where people are looking at 2 years of unemployment before getting an acceptable job offer, it’s hard to ignore the “What if…” scenario, as in “What if this turns out to be like getting in on the ground floor with Google or Microsoft when they were still working from laptops at home?”

Seriously. What if?

Sorting between the losers and the leaders can be a lengthy, costly, and risky endeavor — but as with most things that are worthwhile, you can’t be afraid to take the risk. Taking a risk, however, does not mean that you should jump in blindly; you must do your due diligence!  Letting fear of failure stand in your way will result in nothing but lost opportunities.   And, it’s not YOUR failure if a start-up doesn’t pan out, if it is not at all like the picture painted for you during the seduction stage.

Just as taking a risk in a romantic relationship might lead to a life-long, beautiful and rewarding marriage, it might also lead to disaster.  But if you never go on that first date, you’ll never discover the potential.  So, if you are considering a start-up, approach it much like you would a romantic relationship:  Don’t get married at the end of a first date.  Take time to discover the truth and to learn whether you’ve found a good match!

NOTE:  In a follow-up article resulting from the discussion below, learn more details about the actual situation involved between myself and the two start-ups which caused me grief.  Click here.

~ Lynda C. Watts

About the Author
Find Lynda on LinkedIn
Send Lynda an email
Lynda’s Professional Profile