Stop Moaning And Start Solving

Oh, don't some people moan?  And perhaps that's a good thing on some occasions.  Don't we all need to let off steam every now and then when we feel frustrated, disappointed, angry and even downright disillusioned?

Having colleagues we can have the occasional moan to is a good thing.  Externalising what's going on in our head can serve as a release for pent up emotions and emotional pressure.  The real problem arises when moaning is accepted as the norm rather than the exception in teams and in organisations.  Let me share an example.

When I facilitate leadership development training programmes, there's a clear standard set from the outset with, and in partnership with participants.  That standard goes something like this...


'Shall we all agree that this leadership training event will focus on developing solutions and, in the event of you wanting to have a moan, you're welcome to it - on the condition that you also generate at least one solution to the problem or issue you're moaning about?'

In written form, this invitation or standard may look quite unfriendly, even unhelpful.  But in reality its exactly the opposite.  It's very friendly and extremely helpful in the right context and partnered with a little empathy.  And that context is helping participants, good, decent human beings to take personal responsibility for themselves, their communication and, the problem situations they find themselves in at that moment in time.

My colleague and I have an unwritten rule whereby if either of us are feeling a little (or a lot) negative about a situation or predicament, we give each other permission to have a moan for up to ten minutes each.  And, that's the absolute maximum allowed.  If there's no focus on coming up with a solution, there's no permission to moan.  However inhumane this may sound - it actually works really well!

Why Do People Moan?

On most occasions, moaning is due to at least one of our personal values being transgressed.  For example, if your key personal value is trust, if a colleague makes a commitment to you on an important project and then, chooses to not keep that commitment - and doesn't let you know otherwise, trust can be damaged, the relationship soured and, it's emotionally healthy to find an outlet and share your disappointment with a trusted colleague.  Not too many mind you, or that can develop in to a pity party when you prove just how big a victim you are. And that's not healthy for anybody. Plus, if it develops to this stage, people will start avoiding you anyway.

A five minute moan can help to release stress and anxiety too.  Have you ever noticed one of your colleagues bounding around your office gesticulating and openly showing their captive audience (colleagues who care + those who don't) just how angry they are?  It seems that actively demonstrating disappointment, frustration, anger - and other related emotions is viewed by the perpetrator as a sign that their audience care. But it's exactly the opposite.  They don't care - and your shouting about the office is becoming an unwelcome interruption for them.

Breathe Deeply....

Just because you've calmed down and returned to your normal emotional state after a moan, or negative emotional experience doesn't mean you don't care.  It means that you are now able and ready to return to a more healthy, balanced emotional and mental state.  It means that you are better able to address the issue at hand without resorting to emotional blackmail or guilt tripping.  Tough Talks are most effective when undertaken in an emotionally balanced manner. And, do you know that after an 'emotional hijack, it can take your body up to 48 hours to return to its most balanced emotional state? So there are some potentially dangerous health issues to consider here.

A Question To Ask A Persistent Moaner

If your ear is being repeatedly bent by a constant moaner - and it doesn't matter where they sit or stand in the organisational structure, an effective way of helping them step out of their emotional state and think more clearly (or at worst, sod off and bother some other poor person) is to ask a good question.  And, good questions are not 'So how does that make you feel?' or 'Will s/he ever change?' A really good, snappy, solution focused question is this...

'And how are you maintaining this problem?'

With some people, such a question will push them to fly back at you on auto-pilot, pity party mode with a response such as 'I'M NOT DOING ANYTHING to maintain the problem.  It's not my fault...dah di dah di dah....'  You know how it goes. They're only telling you and moaning to you because they think that you'll listen, and listen sympathetically because you care.  Here's a news flash.  When you persistently moan - PEOPLE STOP CARING! They're just too polite to tell you.

For some people, such a challenging question will get them to pause for thought, look a little puzzled and then respond with something along the lines of 'Oh, I didn't know I was maintaining the problem...but now you mention it, I suppose I am.'

And this is where solutions are found. When finger pointing and blaming stops, personal ownership and responsibility has a space to get involved and re-activated.  Think about it for a second.  Isn't it always easier to expect somebody else to change how they communicate, think, feel and behave?   Another News Flash - You could be waiting a very looooooooong time for that to happen! But waiting for somebody else to change, as well as becoming rather frustrating, can also absolve us of our role in the issue. And if we're involved in a 'Problem' don't we need to be involved in the 'Solution' too?


Getting Focused On Solutions

Another question that can prove helpful for people who are willing to explore solutions is this.

'What are three things you could do and would be happy to do to resolve this specific problem?'

Again, the moaners will quickly and smoothly absolve themselves of any responsibility, sticking with their well rehearsed story that someone else has to change before they themselves can feel better.  But the solution focused people will start to think of solutions.  And the beauty of this is - The Solutions Are Theirs - Not Yours! And this makes them far more likely and far more motivated to act upon their solutions.

Try this approach for 7 days and start to notice how things (and people's thinking) change - for the better!

http://www.SummitTraining.co.uk/

http://www.ScottWatson.co.uk

What To Do When People Screw Up

From Service to Satisfaction - What a Journey

The Christmas shopping madness has started. The spirit of goodwill doesn't appear to have kicked into place yet - at least it hadn't in the hectic Leeds city centre last Saturday.

The problem? Lots of people eager, perhaps a little too eager, to get their gift shopping completed before the streets and shops got too busy. Well, we're not really bothered about the streets being too busy are we? That we can handle. But queues? Oh no, not again. Waiting, waiting and more waiting. only to be served by a store assistant who doesn't smile (because they've seen the length of the queue they HAVE TO serve) and so in their own mind are planning just how stressful their day will be. Isn't it strange how some people plan their stress...in advance? Talk about an unproductive mindset that could ultimately ruin your day, week (or even life).

Thank you for your patience

I visited a beauty store in Leeds last Saturday to buy a few gifts for my wife. And yes, I'm rather good at forward-planning so set off from home at 9am in an effort to avoid the worst of the expected stampede of people who can sometimes forget their manners when 'enjoying' the Christmas shopping experience. And, it was this forward-planning and foresight that allowed me to witness a simply fantastic demonstration of turning a problem into a solution - a very creative solution too. Here's what happened.

Having been served by a very helpful female staff member at the store, I'd selected my purchases and walked to join the queue of around 20 shoppers who were waiting to be called to pay for their purchases. And that's where the problems started.

The two staff members behind the cash desk were fumbling around with a cash register, paying no attention to the queuing customers and talking to each other in shallow whispers. A full 60 seconds later, there was no communication forthcoming from behind the cash desk, or from anywhere else for that matter. And wouldn't you just know it. One of the employees behind the cash desk wore a badge stating 'MANAGER. But clearly, this 'MANAGER' was not 'managing' very well at all. She was so involved in the problem that she forgot that the people in the queue were not obligated to wait AND actually wanted to give her their hard-earned cash. And that ultimately means, the people who keep her, and her employees in jobs were not allowed to purchase their items, at least not for now.

As some members of the growing queue began to share their frustrations with each other, others chose to return their items to the shelves and simply leave the store. After all, these people are actually in the store and in the queue for the cash till BECAUSE THEY WANT TO GIVE THEIR MONEY TO THE STORE! It's quite a simple concept that some retailers should concentrate on. Accept money from those individuals who wish to give it to you.

A full 2 minutes following my noticing the initial fumbling behind the cash desk, still no communication from the Manager about what was happening, why it was happening or, how she would ensure that the now even longer queue of shoppers would be cared for. Now, I'm a patient guy and I am more understanding than many people that problems can arise. And that's ok with me. What I do appreciate knowing is how the problem (which is affecting my shopping experience) is to be resolved. I'm from the 'Just tell me and I'll understand' tribe of shoppers.

Saved by an Angel

With more staff gathering round the cash desk,the manager becoming even more frustrated and more would-be customers leaving the store - without spending any money, it became apparent that one of the cash tills was not operational. Yes, there's only so many times you can say 'Re-Boot' before even the queuing customers want to shout out 'Stop RE-BOOTING...Even we know it's not working'.

Now for the flip. And a fantastic flip at that. In a moment of pure inspiration (or perhaps, desperation), the young lady who had served me 5 minutes earlier takes a stand. Here she goes in a warm, genuine and very apologetic voice. And remember, at this point, the manager is still not speaking to customers in any way and not aware that a public demonstration of brilliance is about to take place - right in front of her.

'Ladies and gentlemen, as you can see the cash till isn't working.....and we continue to re-boot...even though that isn't working.' At this point, the shoppers focus is drawn to the solitary figure of a smiling store assistant attempting to help, and without her Managers' permission or knowledge.

At this point, the Manager, and crowd of followers look up and towards their renegade colleague. How could she break rank and dare to think for herself? She continued 'One of our two cash tills isn't working, BUT, the other one is and we can now serve you on this one.' Fantastic eh? Even the manager was so involved in the problem which was the faulty cash till that her awareness wasn't drawn to the fact that their other cash till was completely operational and waiting to start chomping cash and visa cards. Remember, would-be buyers are still leaving the queue and exiting the store without making their purchase/s.

And on she goes, 'Now, I just want to let you know that I can't sing...and I can't dance very well...' drawing smiles and giggles from her audience,...now for the dramatic pause and a bundle of shoppers wondering where this was leading.... 'BUT I AM THE BEST gift wrapper you'll meet in Leeds today, so please bear with us and we'll do our best to take good care of you.'

No applause from her audience, but she attracted lots of smiles, a few 'Thank You's and an abundance of goodwill. As her reactive colleagues got their brains in to gear, she politely asked the next in line how they would like their gifts wrapped - in a box? in a bag? Would you like a bow too? Even grumpy children got a treat as, after seeking parents permission, she asked if they would like a sweetie. All of these questions and a few polite and timely offers helped her to flip a problem with 'Customer Service' in to an experience of 'Customer Satisfaction', at least satisfaction with her contribution.

This is a true story about an experience I had last Saturday. Now for some questions for you about your organisation:

- Do you focus on delivering 'Customer Service' or 'Customer Satisfaction'? And do you actually understand just how your bottom-line financial performance is adversely impacted by your employees missing opportunities to satisfy would-be and actual customers?

- Do you train your employees, not just customer service staff, but, sales people, even your IT team to focus on delivering customer satisfaction? If not, you're very likely to be wasting your company money. Just because you don't see it go missing, doesn't mean it's not being wasted.

- How do you actually know when a customer of yours is genuinely 'satisfied' with your product or service? And beyond that, how do you know when they are genuinely 'satisfied' or 'dis-satified' with the quality of service/dis-service you delivered?

- Excellent customer satisfaction doesn't just save you money (fewer complaints, more efficient communication, right-first-time), it can actually make your company money too.

In short, forget about delivering excellent customer service. It's a worn out statement that whilst well-meaning, has become an empty platitude thrown around by some corporate bosses and many motivational (or as i term many of them 'Irritational') speakers that it's become virtually worthless. Focus on satisfaction and your financial performance could be boosted beyond your highest expectations.

Please Just Answer the Question

For those of you based in the UK, you will be familiar with the BBC's popular mid-week politics programme 'Question Time' presented by an highly respected journalist.

For those of you not familiar with the show, in brief, it's a live studio audience (always a good thing - checking that the audience is 'a live') who put questions and allegations to an 'expert' panel. The panel may consist of politicians from the 3 major parties, an independent, such as an economist or leading charity figure and many others.

Now on this occasion, the show was to be broadcast from the city of Blackburn, and the audience wasn't the usual mix of frustrated adults, it consisted entirely of teenage school children from Blackburn. And one member of the audience was a 15 year old girl whose family I have known for many years. And she had a question. A pretty good one too.

What happens next is something that, if you experience, I expect you don't enjoy or appreciate. Personally I find it rude and disrespectful. Here's what happened.

Her point related to what she perceived as an imbalance in caring for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan who, were fighting a war which, perhaps they don't support, but are legally obligated to fight. Here's the point she made to the panel after being advised of the funds a friend of hers received for her private education.

'Why is it that a child receives over £6,000 for private education when soldiers are dying because they haven't got the correct protective clothing and equipment?'

A straightforward, pointed question deserving of an answer from at least one panel member. A question that, having been answered honestly and fully, could have provided some context regarding the benefits certain soldiers have due to their rank or length of service. Yes, somehow linking private education with the loss of a human life would be difficult, but perhaps a link worth exploring - especially to an audience who in future years will decide who they trust the most (or mis-trust the least) to lead Britain.

The response from the presenter/facilitator was brief. An acknowledgement of the question....and then on to the next subject.

What is it like for you when you ask a question and the person decides to evade, talk fluff or refuse to answer the question altogether? Does this happen at work? Why do some people say that they welcome your views/opinion and thoughts and then simply by-pass the very point they made?

When this happens in the workplace, people become dis-engaged, mis-trusting and to some extent, not caring anymore. It's time to lead by example and answer honestly the tough questions that sometime pop up.

If you type Jeremny Paxman and Michael Howard into YouTube you'll see this standard at its very best. Just look what happens when the politician evades the question....and the pit bull terrier of a journalist won't let him escape.

It's Only Words - So Be Very Careful

Have you ever considered the impact that our language has on ourselves and also on other people? OK, you have probably had one or two occasions when you have said something in the heat of the moment that you've later regretted. Ouch! But what about everyday language, phrases that don't sound like they are harmful, but really can be.

Think about these little nuggets:

'I've spoken to him til I'm blue in the face'...No you haven't. A blue face usually means you're either choking or your body is freezing. Nothing more. Have you ever seen someone's face go blue just because they're a little peeved at someone?

'He's too long in the tooth to learn anything new'. What have long teeth got to do with someone's ability and/or willingness to learn?

'You can't teach an old dog new tricks'. Well, unless you work in a zoo or for the RSPCA, there's unlikely to be any dogs or tricks. Yet again, a few carefully selected words can cause problems.

During my very early years in executive and management development, some one to one coaching sessions could become rather heated. The key reason was the client had something on his or her mind and this forum was the only or safest place to be really open and genuine - which is always a nice experience. One such instance which I do have permission to share with you is when a very demanding boss who felt he was CONSTANTLY being LET DOWN by his 4 direct reports had reached THE END OF THE LINE (what line?) and was intent on taking these individuals OFF LINE (nice way of saying a real rollocking) and a PIECE OF MY MIND. He had been KICKED IN THE TEETH and STABBED IN THE BACK so many times that enough was enough.

This client was usually very assertive in his approach but not aggressive. Thankfully, our brief relationship had developed in to a high level trust relationship and we had permission to question, challenge and disagree with each other, but only on the condition that such behaviour would help him develop and grow. So here's what happened. After listening to a full 7 minutes of profanities mixed in with a table leg being kicked, profuse perspiring and my ears losing their feeling, I politely asked 'May I see your teeth?'. 'What?' he replied, somewhat shocked by my unusual request. 'May I see your teeth, just for a moment. I'd really like to see your gnashers', posturing with a big smile and clattering my teeth for full effect. His anger turned to shock, his shock turned to confusion, all in a matter of seconds. I continued, 'OK, you won't show me your teeth, I understand....so please take off your shirt.' This was a risky step. What reaction would I receive? Well, if you've been watching the tv series 'Ashes to Ashes' and picture the chief cop, Gene Hunt, the response wouldn't have looked out of place coming from his mouth. 'PROFANITY, no way pal', was followed a second or two later with a smile and a laugh when he pointed to me and said 'I know what you're up to Scott. You want to see all of the knife scars on my back don't you?'. 'Absolutely, and I'm sure there are many, aren't there?' I replied.

From this moment on, the coaching session returned to a calm, thinking environment where the things that mattered most to him and his company were thought through, talked through and solutions to each of the problems generated. And all in less than 2 hours. During the following 3 months, 3 of his managers began to perform better than they had ever done, while 1 other left the organisation by mutual agreement.

Just think what the possible outcome could have been if this really decent, hard-working and caring man had handled the situation in the manner he initially had intended. Managers could have been the walking wounded (oh, there I go, I'm doing it now), and their brains would have counted this latest verbal assault as the norm.

So remember, be very careful about the language you use and also, check understanding of what other people actually mean when they use old cliches to express how they are feeling at any given moment. It could save you many headaches and a few heartaches too.

A Quick Lesson in Developing Trust

In 2005, the Italia Masters Tennis Championship brought together Fernando Verdasco of Spain and Andy Roddick of the USA. The battle had reached match point in favour of Roddick and Verdasco was to serve. Verdasco did serve, it was judged as a fault. He served for a second time - and once again, the umpire called Verdasco's serve as a fault. Match Roddick!

Well, it didn't quite work out that way. Roddick had just been awarded the match and by default, the cheers of the crowd. As Verdasco started the traditional walk to the net to shake hands with his opponent, Roddick remained still. Why would the victor remain still? Was he injured, shocked or was something else happening? It was indeed something very special and deeply human happening. Roddick was about to challenge the umpire's decision. A decision that was not only in his own favour, but one which had awarded him the match and safe passage to the next round.

Roddick politely and assertively stated his view that the ball was actually 'in' and not 'out'. He stated that the proof of his own call was that a slight indentation had formed on the clay court where Verdasco's second serve had impacted. As the ball had landed on the line and not outside the line, the match umpire allowed Roddick to overrule him.

As history shows, Verdasco went on to win the match and progress to the next round. But while Roddick may have lost the match, he won in so many other ways. He demonstrated strength of character, deeply held personal values relating to trust, honour and integrity, and if you were umpiring his next match and Roddick challenged your decision, might you just be a little more open to listening and understanding his viewpoint than you would of other sports men and women who moan, groan, complain and downright cheat to get their own way?

As my wonderful mother used to say to me 'Scott, always be honest. It's really easy to remember.'

Personal Impact - Getting Below The Surface to Shared Understanding

We all have an impact. Whether we know it or not, whether we care or not, we all impact other human beings with our gestures, communication and even our personal values. Have a think, if you and I work together and in the early stages of the relationship, we both agree that 'honesty' is of great importance to us, should this agreement and shared value make working together less stressful, more enjoyable and even more fulfilling? Nope, not at all! Unless that is we both understand what exactly 'honesty' means to each of us. For example, many moons ago, I was invited to facilitate an open and honest discussion between a senior manager and a subordinate. They had completed such a discussion at interview stage and the senior manager (also the recruiter) stated that one of the main reasons he selected the applicant for the job was that he 'felt on the same page'. Very dangerous - especially when just 3 months into the working relationship, their relationship had become toxic, information that should have been shared wasn't being shared and both individuals had founded their own little 'gang' to bad mouth their colleague and reinforce the supposed 'fact' that they were right and the other person was wrong. Gangs can be very powerful in helping our ego be stroked, they won't though dig us out of the very deep hole we will eventually find ourselves in when gang members leave, change allegiance or simply get fed up of listening to us bad mouth someone or persistently moan on.

How could this happen after such a positive and enjoyable selection interview? Quite easily actually! Following discussions with both parties I established that the word 'honesty' had a very different meaning for each person. For the new staff member, honesty meant that there was open, honest dialogue and information was shared in a timely manner with everyone's best interests at heart. There was to be no personal or hidden agenda overriding the needs of the team or business. To do such things would amount to 'being dishonest'. On the other hand, the manager stated that for him 'honesty' meant 'telling people how it is', 'letting people know where they stand' and also included ' and 'giving feedback that makes people listen'.

Let's bear in mind that in the real world (not our own little world) in the absence of indisputable facts we can only tell people how we see it, not how it actually is. We can only provide our opinion about a subject or situation. While it may not be what we can accurately call 'the truth', it is nonetheless 'our truth'. Letting people know where they stand can be extremely useful if it is designed to agree roles, responsibilities and boundaries within which someone is to operate. This clear context can stop individuals and teams going off track and missing deadlines and quality standards. When it is used though to set a command and control, ego based relationship, it can serve to destroy trust, loyalty and employee engagement. And why wouldn't we want to provide feedback that makes people listen? The word 'makes' in this instance reflected a 'I'm right so don't dare to speak back to me' approach rather than 'helping' someone want to listen - and really appreciate the feedback being provided. Indeed, helping someone want to listen is more focused on win-win, collaboration, supportive and even motivational, simply because it is said with a positive intention that will probably help the relationship grow and prosper rather than fall apart and cause toxicity.

As it turned out, when both parties shared their definition of 'honesty' and what it meant to them, the relationship got on to an even keel. Both parties gave each other permission to provide candid feedback but only if it was with an intention of improving a situation - backstabbing was no longer to be the order of the day. A wonderful demonstration of integrity - which is another personal value that they shared. I only hope they got some shared clarity on what this actually meant to each other as this too could cause problems that wouldn't be spoken about for many months, just like honesty.

One powerful lesson I learned from my mother was 'Always be honest with me, it's a high standard to hold, and it's far easier to remember'. If only business leaders would demonstrate such a standard wouldn't our world be a little bit more enjoyable?

Influencing - With a Tip!

My partner and I enjoyed a relaxing evening in Manchester this weekend. We stayed in a city centre hotel and not knowing the city's eateries, asked a member of the hotel staff for some recommendations. Almost immediately, he recommended a speciality steak house and asked us both 'what do you think?' After receiving a definite 'YES' from us both he asked our preferred time to eat (not past 9pm) and said he would call the restaurant but was pretty confident the place would not have any tables available...but he would do his best. NOW WATCH WHAT HAPPENED.

Upon returning to us 5 minutes later he coolly advised us that the restaurant was indeed 'packed to the rafters' and that their next available table would be 10.30pm (outside of our preferred time). Pausing for a few seconds he no doubt used our expressions of disappointment as leverage to then state 'BUT I've managed to get the receptionist to reserve a table for you both AT 8.30...as you wanted.

So what happened here? This chap identified parameters within which to work his influence. He applied the rule of information (I know the best place in town), scarcity (packed to the rafters), likeability (he was a decent enough chap who had served us politely at the bar) and finally the rule of reciprocity. How? Well, look what I have done for YOU. Now, it's time for YOU to do something for ME. Yes, he got a thank you and a fiver tip, which he duly accepted.

Have a think for a few minutes. Who is influencing you? Are they doing it honestly and ethically? What are some of the influencing traps you just seem to fall in to without thinking? I highly recommend you explore Dr Robert Cialdini's work at www.InfluenceatWork.com This gentleman is a true expert in his field and shares his expertise in a wonderfully kind manner.

The Right Honourable? MP's Expenses and Trust

Print and broadcast media in the UK continue to focus on the MP expenses scandal. Even the use of the word 'scandal' impacts how we feel about or perceive a situation - even before we know the facts.

A growing number of MP's (people supposedly trusted...yeah right, to represent the residents of their constituency in an honest and fair manner) are being identified as having taken advantage of the rules governing the claiming of expenses, in addition to their salary, which for a non ministerial level MP is approximately £67,000 per annum. This salary equates to approximately £5,583 per month before taxes.

The BBC reported that former Minister Elliot Morley had been suspended from the Labour Party, the governing political party, for claiming £16,000 expenses relating to a mortgage which had actually already been repaid. The main opposition party, the Conservative party, reported that Douglas Hogg, was to repay £2,200 he claimed for the clearing of his moat (nice if you can afford it) at his home. An abundance of other questionable claims continue to surface, and perhaps this will continue during the coming weeks and months. But why is this proving to be such a popular and disappointing news story?

Remember the bankers?

UK bankers have in recent months been in the firing line of MP's for supposedly 'fat-cat' salary packages with significant bonuses for hitting short-term targets. Targets that appear to have contributed to causing the recession that the UK currently finds itself in. The 'looking after number one' mentality of senior bankers was heavily criticised by MP's, many of whom called for swift and decisive action to stop the banking fat-cats continuing to benefit from large pay-offs when being removed from office. What are the sayings about what goes around comes around and those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones?

Who do you really vote for?

If you're approach to politics is anything like mine, you won't study every local and national policy of each political party vying for your vote. You'll either pick out a few policies that are most important to you at any given time - such as family welfare, taxes such as income or mortgage related taxes and a few more. Then it's about the candidate's personal impact. Does s/he look like a person who can be trusted? Do they create some kind of emotional connection with you? Do they strike a chord with you in terms of what they are passionately standing for - or even what they are standing against? Think of it this way. Do you vote for the candidate you TRUST THE MOST or the candidate you MISTRUST THE LEAST? There is a massive difference in the quality of any such relationship and as those MP's identified as being rather generous in their expenses claims will soon find out, they may lose not just the trust, but the votes the next time they choose to stand for re-election.

The danger of generalising

It's important to remember that not all MP's from all political parties have made excessive, or what could be viewed by some people as simply dishonest. Holding the opinion that 'All politicians are .................' may be factually inaccurate. And there is a difference between a fact and an opinion. A fact can be supported by indisputable evidence, whereas and opinion is simply a belief we hold about a person, group or situation. Even the reports that 'Trust in MP's is at an all time low' is factually inaccurate isn't it? Perhaps if the media added 'since our records began' would be more accurate. When we feel upset, disappointed, let down or even betrayed, we human beings tend to focus solely or largely on what's wrong rather than remembering what is good about a relationship or situation. And it's a good thing that we can feel these emotions. It would be a bad thing though if the people who actually voted for the MP's to get them their seat in our Parliament didn't use this as an important lesson in leading by example. Don't we have a habit of judging ourselves by our intentions and judging other people by their actions or behaviour?

Do the rules of the game need changing?

However ridiculous or annoying some of the expenses claims may first appear to us, many of them appear to have been made WITHIN THE RULES. OK, perhaps, it is now time to revisit the rules, develop more clarity and perhaps a nice bonus would be a level of transparency. When there is an absence of transparency, some people may steer their thinking towards suspecting there is a hidden or personal agenda rather than finding out the facts. This suspicion leads to trust falling apart - and it can happen very quickly as we are currently witnessing. Doesn't this bring to our attention another point worth considering? That even when acting within the rules and regulations, we can still break unwritten rules and expectations which relate to integrity, character, trust and transparency? MP's may wish to remember that during the war crime hearings following the second world war, many high-ranking German soldiers told the hearings that they were 'just following orders' - they complied with a higher authority who instructed them to behave in such a way, however inhumane or sickening the outcome of such behaviour/action.

To step down or to step up?

As all of the main political parties appear to have been implicated in the expenses scandal, how likely is it that Mr Cameron, Mr Brown or Mr Clegg will be insisting that their opposite number step down from office? Not likely at all I expect. When trust is lost, it can take what seems like forever to restore. It can be done though but it takes people og good character to step up, accept responsibility, speak authentically, apologise genuinely and set the example that the people who voted for them in the first place have a right to expect. Focus on character and not reputation. Our reputation is outside of ourselves and simply an opinion held by other people. It's outside of our control - however, when people say that we're wonderful, it can stroke out ego very nicely. But what happens to our reputation when those very same people change their mind? OUCH! Our character is ours, it is owned by us, is developed by us and is not in any way influenced or controlled by the good, or bad opinions of others. Character involves developing an abundance of trust - self-trust (trust for self) and even if nobody else knows that you have been dishonest or at the very least, economical with the truth - you know. Shouldn't that be lesson enough?

A comedian named Johnny Casson recently stated that 'Children's nappies and politicians should both be changed regularly. And for the very same reasons.' While Johnny's role is to entertain, wouldn't it be a good thing if the people we vote in to power to represent us chose to act in a way that reflects the trust placed in them? And perhaps it doesn't sound too authentic or accurate when the MP's involved in the current situation refer to each other 'As my honourable friend'. It just doesn't sound true anymore, at least for me.

Relate the current situation back to your workplace. Do you choose to focus on developing your reputation or developing your personal character?

Do you speak honestly and candidly about when you've messed up or made an error of judgment

Or do you keep quiet, hoping that nobody notices?

What do you feel it would be like to work for someone who wasn't transparent and who you knew was taking advantage of their position?