Duluth News Ndjancok

Beware of Temporary Assignments to Special Projects

ACTUAL CASE HISTORY: Maureen was thrilled to be hired into the world's third-largest travel-services company as a Senior Vice President of her own division, with profit-and-loss ("P&L") authority. Finally, she would have, in effect, her own distinct business to run, and could show the world her ability to make a mediocre-performing business into a rising-star enterprise. This was surely a solid stepping-stone to her eventual goal: consideration for a CEO position.

However, within six months of her arrival, in the midst of top-level discussions of reorganization, there seemed to develop a territorial battle related to Maureen's primary areas of responsibility. Her CEO came to her, privately, and asked her to consider "a tremendous opportunity": heading up the corporate-wide Six Sigma Initiative, the quality-driven discipline and methodology that has revolutionized many American corporations. Maureen was told that she was the CEO's personal choice, she would have company-wide authority, and her selection had the complete backing of the Board of Directors. It seemed to her that turning down the CEO and Board would not be wise; and the opportunity to learn the entire organization seemed tantalizing. Maureen accepted.

Two years later, after successful incorporation of the Six Sigma Initiative, she received the bad news: there was "at this time" nothing available "at her level." She was presented with the company's standard severance package.

LESSON TO LEARN: There are many people out there - especially in information technology - who today wish they'd never been chosen to head up their former employer's Y2K efforts. That's because many of these people lost their jobs shortly after the year 2000 began, without a major Y2K problem. They'd expected that this seeming "special assignment" would be a feather in their cap, especially if things ended successfully. And most were surprised how much this "special assignment" hurt their careers.

Why? Two primary reasons: First, the "benign" reason: distance from perceived value, in general, and revenue stream, in particular. Simply put, being taken out of the mainstream of a company's operational activities can make you, over time, something of an outsider, and more importantly, an outsider whose continued employment does not seem necessary. For example, you may have done a fine job of overseeing the relocation of the division headquarters from Duluth to Denver, but once the division is up and running in Denver, there may not be another job for you to transfer into. Once "out of the loop," you may find it hard to get back in. Bear in mind that those with most job security are those who are close to a revenue stream.

Second, the "malignant" reason: one way to get rid of a perceived political foe is to give them a supposed plum, out-of-the-way assignment. Special assignments have a way of coming to completion, or eventually losing their funding. It's a common political ploy. In order to terminate a political foe, you generally need one of three things: (a) bad performance; (b) misconduct; or (c) position elimination. Of these three, the third is the easiest to bring about. If you take on a "special assignment," and that special assignment is de-funded, or completed, or re-assessed as a lower priority, you may find it to have been a bad career move.

WHAT YOU SHOULD DO: You shouldn't simply avoid all special assignments. To the contrary, they may represent opportunities. With this in mind:

• Consider carefully whether it's wise to take the special assignment;

• Make sure the special assignment has secure political support, and secure long-term funding;

• Most importantly, "fold your parachute first." That is, negotiate and confirm in writing specific assurances that you will have a "chair" to sit on when "the music stops." A re-entry plan is essential to acceptance of "special assignment."

Alan L. Sklover, Founding Member of Sklover & Donath, LLC and Founder of Sklover Working Wisdom, empowers employees worldwide to stand up for themselves at work. From his offices in New York City's Rockefeller Center, Alan has devoted his 28 years of professional life to counseling and representing employees worldwide on how to negotiate and navigate for job security and career success. Mr. Sklover's practice concentration is in the negotiation of senior executive employment, compensation and severance agreements, and in counseling senior executives in career navigation. Learn the trade secrets and 'uncommon common sense' of Attorney Alan L. Sklover, the leading authority on "Negotiating for Yourself at Work™" at http://masalexs1.blogspot.com/.

"

Time For a New Message on Family Violence?

Outlined by Miriam Ehrensaft at the Society for Prevention Research conference in Washington, last week, these and other links in the chain of effects are considered to be potentially the most fruitful targets for preventative activity.

On the protective side are strategies for boosting children's impulse control and social cognition so that they are able to recognize tensions in relationships and to react more effectively.

Both avenues run counter to the perspective which regards family violence as the fault of a wayward masculine impulse to exercise power and control. And the preventative programs they point to consequently depart significantly from the dominant domestic violence intervention known as The Duluth model.

The increasingly controversial creation of Minnesota Program Development Inc., Duluth has been found to work not much better than court ordered treatment, mainly as a result of its high drop-out rates.

The contrast with Duluth was well illustrated at last week's meeting by Vangie Foshee and her work on the Safe Dates program.

Foshee has focused on the abuse encountered during an adolescent's first romantic relationships. Her studies show that about 12 per cent of adolescents are likely to say they have been physically maltreated during a date in the last 18 months. Nearly 30 per cent disclose psychological abuse.

The consequences of fights in these early relationships are associated with an increased risk of depression, drug, alcohol or substance misuse and poor sexual health. Hitting a date in adolescence is strongly linked with risks of later domestic violence.

Curiously, despite these promising opportunities for effective prevention, there has been little investment in finding out how to stop violence in relationships before it starts. Foshee found that of the 56 reported prevention programs in this area, only 13 had been evaluated and just six had been subjected to a randomized controlled trial.

Safe Dates represents Foshee's reading of the evidence. Her intervention sets out to change typical adolescent attitudes towards gender and to give young people the skills to resolve conflict.

Randomized controlled trials in the schools where it has been offered indicate that it reduces psychological aggression over a three-year period and physical abuse over four years, arguably more than sufficient purchase to make inroads into the risk of later domestic violence.

Variations on the program are currently being tested. Families for Safe Dates provides materials designed to be convenient for busy families to use at home.

Prevention in this area is in its infancy. But a challenge is being mounted to orthodox child protection and domestic violence systems that seem to be reserved for impoverished families and which intervene when it is often too late to make much difference.

Prevention Action (http://masalexs1.blogspot.com/) is an online news publication reporting internationally on prevention and early intervention programs for improving children's health and development.