Skip to main content
Toll Free Number: (919) 280-1217

Tag: funeral home staff

Should Women Wear Pant Suits?

style-9091-slim-fit-notch-lapel-one-button-angled-flap-pocket-mid-hip-length-womens-pant-suit-for-work-with-plain-front-wide-leg-pantsI seem to have a penchant for joining fights that aren’t mine. Not long ago I was presenting a seminar on dress and decorum to funeral directors at a large state convention. Several women asked for my opinion on wearing pants. Frankly, I hadn’t thought about it so I didn’t have one.

Since then, I have been doing an informal survey. It seems that many funeral homes require a dress or skirt be worn by females at all times.

I have learned that a dress or skirt can often be awkward at the most inopportune moments. While I can not report based on experience, I am told that certain physical activities necessary to the profession (i.e. removing bodies, lowering caskets at the cemetery and so on) cause a skirt or dress to “ride up” resulting in exposure or forcing the hapless female to simultaneously adjust her clothing while attempting to help their colleague.

Since I have been asked for my opinion I offer it here. If I owned a funeral home I would allow my female staff to wear Professional style pant suits. I would also encourage them to wear skirts or dresses at visitations and receptions where the risk of embarrassment would be less.

And while I am at it my wife says I should also remind women that not all women look good sans pantyhose. (Again, I wouldn’t know this personally)

Employee Pushback – A Strategy

Grumpy Old Man --- Image by © Ned Frisk Photography/Corbis

A client and friend of mine recently spent days revising the staff schedule to be more efficient and effective. He took great pains to think about its impact on staff and did his best to devise a plan that would work best for the funeral home AND create the least inconvenience for his staff. After he finished explaining it to staff at a staff meeting one of his staff members pushed back hard. This resulted in others joining suit (crowd mentality).

The problem was not that it was a bad schedule. In fact, it was a much better schedule. The problem was that it was a different schedule and the staff was used to the old one and had adjusted their lives accordingly.

My client felt like he lost control of the meeting and called me to ask how he should handle it.

He was mad, especially at the instigator. But really he was hurt because the staff had not appreciated the pains he had gone to consider their needs.

What should he have done?

Today’s management philosophy is to let staff have their say and listen carefully. Certainly that is good advice. But what most people miss is that their say should be mutually constructive. In other words, pushing back is always destructive and should be stopped in its tracks.  A collaborative approach requires that insights and alternatives be offered that make the solution better. If the intent is simply to resist then, at least in my mind, they immediately surrender the privilege of input.

So, here is what I would have done:

  • I would have taken time to listen to their input but not their complaints.
  • If they offered no constructive insights or alternatives I would tell them so:
    • “All I hear from you is negative and that’s not how we operate any more.”
    • Then I would shut up and it would be on them to respond constructively
  • If they offered constructive insights I would summarize them and tell them what adjustments I plan on making or if I needed to think on their insights.
  • Either way I would restate the company’s vision and mission to remind them of our community purpose.

What I would not do:

  • Waiver or appear irresolute
  • Get mad
  • argue defensively
  • whine
  • Appear frustrated

A good thing to remember:

You are the adult

Finally, if I had a chronic offender who simply seems determined to undermine me in every way (what I call the “ten call man”) I would let them go… and I might do it publicly to make a point.

If you fail to walk in your god – given authority someone will take it away from you and use it against you.

Serve more families, work less and be more profitable

Staff shortages among licensed professions have been successfully addressed by changing the model in the medical and legal professions. The solution is simple: focus skilled licensed staff on the right duties and supplement them with trained lower level staff. The result: Licensees handle more cases, work fewer hours, produce more income and, as a byproduct, are happier in their work.

I became aware of such a working model in funeral service last year and traced it to my friend David Tudor. I asked David to briefly share his insights with us.

                                                                                                Alan Creedy

The Highest and Best Use Model For Funeral Home Staff Management

Softening revenue resulting from increased cremation has funeral home profitability very much compromised. In addition to reduced revenue, appropriate profitability has a direct correlation to wages and benefits paid to staff for delivering at need funeral services. Wage costs along with associated benefits often are 45% or more of sales; when, in fact, this ratio should be less than 40% combined.

Since the highest paid employees are often licensed funeral directors it is here we should first focus on determining optimum wage utilization. Consider that a typical at need service requires about forty (40) hours of staff time. Of this total less than ten (10) hours are required to be licensed time. Care must be taken to assure many of the ancillary, non-licensed duties do not involve an inordinate amount of a director’s time.

Increasing staff utilization doesn’t mean working harder…just smarter. A LFD earns premium earnings for applying his/her skills and experience arranging, directing and embalming. Therefore providing structure and support to minimize their time with non-licensed duties must be continually addressed. Accomplishing this is not a matter of directive, but in fact a defined staffing approach and structure. Elements of this include:

Director of Operations (DFSO) – Someone designated to oversee, coordinate and assign new at need cases…not leaving it for a collegial staff discussion. The DFSO also determines the staffing coverage for services, including the assigning of non-licensed part timers for ancillary support duties. This frees directors for the next licensed obligation.

A Pool of Part Time Associates – Using the medical term “PRN;” (use as needed) these are individuals, notified today, for a service need tomorrow. This PRN pool should contain about three (3) to four (4) people per every 100 annual funeral home cases.

About this Pool

  • They must be recruited, sought out, don’t wait for them to show up at your door.
  • There are usually three (3) categories of PRN’s:

Visitation Associates – greeters at visitation.

Funeral Service Associates – perform all the ancillary, non-licensed tasks of a LFD.

Transfer staff – physically qualified for first call duties.

  • They must be trained in your methods and practices (Use of a job description as a training guide makes orientation and training easy and effective.)
  • Compensation can be an hourly rate, perhaps with a 3 hour minimum or a flat fee. Often they are paid a small stipend to be on call for night transfer duty.
  • The pool will have turnover, do not let that deter you. Keep focus on maintaining a full complement of part time associates. Consider maintaining a pool of three (3) people per 100 annual calls.

If a LFD can be supported to increase his/her license utilization from 65% to 80% that will mean handling 20 more at need cases per year. (Ninety (90) percent plus utilization should be the goal and is comfortably attainable.) Implementing a PRN pool to support two (2) or three (3) LFD’s can easily mean not hiring another LFD.

A large client of mine, realized this advantage years ago. By increasing their part time staff over a 3 year period, and through attrition reduced their licensed staff more than 60%. Included with the new staff model, their previous sixty (60) hour workweek schedule was reduced to just over forty (40) hours, with no decrease in compensation to staff associates.

In states that allow non-licensed transfers the benefit for the firm and LFD is even greater. Firms create a pool of two (2) to three (3) part time non-licensed individuals. (Trauma experienced first responders are excellent candidates.) The LFD on call coordinates the night transfer from a “bedside – station.”

Bottom Line – To increase your bottom line, don’t burden yourself with misdirecting the use of a licensed associate.

David Tudor is President of The Directions Group, Asheville, NC.

David’s counsel has benefited funeral homes nation-wide for over four (4) decades.

thetudors@charter.net

Is A Scarcity Mentality Keeping You From Being A Good Leader?

A Scarcity Mentality is the zero-sum paradigm of life.

People with a Scarcity Mentality have a very difficult time sharing recognition and credit, power or profit – even with those who help in the production. They also have a a very hard time being genuinely happy for the success of other people. Yet it is a scarcity mentality that prevails in funeral service and gives rise to so much of the infighting that holds us all back.

One of the primary responsibilities of a leader is to develop people by empowering them.  But this doesn’t mean just giving people the keys to the vault and hoping for the best.  It is hard and complicated work.

Almost 40 years ago an article appeared that has since become a classic.  Entitled: “Who’s Got the Monkey?” it used a charming metaphorical style to illustrate how we often voluntarily become subordinates to our subordinates.  Characterizing problems as monkeys we learn that by assuming every problem is a joint problem we actually unwittingly cooperate in this game of transferring monkeys.

Over time, it becomes harder and harder to tell who is working for whom!

The essence of staff development is teaching people to manage their own monkeys

This makes sense and the article goes on to describe a very precise method for transferring monkeys back to their rightful owners.   Also included is an equally precise outline for the care and feeding of monkeys:

  1. Monkeys should be fed or shot
  2. The monkey population should be kept below the maximum number the manager has time to feed
  3. Monkeys should be fed by appointment only
  4. Monkeys should only be fed face-to-face or by telephone
  5. Every monkey should have an assigned next feeding time

How A Scarcity Mentality Hinders Your Ability To Manage Monkeys and Develop People

25 years after the original publication of “Who’s Got the Monkey?” Steven Covey published a followup article entitled: “Making Time For Gorillas” In which he very accurately observed that we had made little progress in the development of leadership styles beyond the “Command And Control” style that prevailed at the time of the original publication.  “Command and Control” is one of the two dominant leadership styles in funeral service.

Covey’s insight included the observation that for leaders to successfully manage monkeys they must first invest in developing their people.  “Command and Control” types are reluctant to do that.  Worse,

They are actually eager to take on their subordinate’s monkeys.

“…many managers may subconsciously fear that a subordinate taking the initiative will make them appear less strong and a little more vulnerable.” Says Covey

Covey also tells us that surveys report that executives feel half or more of their time is spent on matters that are urgent but not important.  They are trapped in an endless cycle of dealing with other people’s monkeys...reluctant to help those people take their own initiative.

If I were a “Command and Control” type here is what I would do:

  1. Download and read the original articles by clicking on the image below
  2. Let my wife and kids read it so they would have a better understanding of why I never have time for them
  3. Share it with my staff
  4. Get over myself and start making the investment in my people so that I could trust them and I could enjoy my life.
It’s your choice.
YOU CAN BE A SHOP FOREMAN OR A LEADER

 CLICK ON THE IMAGE TO READ THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE

 

Esse Quam Videri

I have to admit I tense up whenever someone begins using the Ritz Carlton as an example Funeral Service should use to fashion its own customer service profile.  Not that we can’t learn some things from the Ritz.  We most certainly can!  But it is a dangerous recommendation when we fail to “Go Deep” on the pain and effort it took for the Ritz to get to that level of service.  Another example of mistaking form for substance.

I have now lived in North Carolina for almost 28 years.  Within a year or so of arriving I noticed that the state motto is “Esse Quam Videri” which is latin for:

“To Be Rather Than To Seem”

I can’t find anyone who knows the genesis of that motto but I like it and have adopted it for my own.  It’s a good standard and it’s good to have a standard.  Especially when you fail to meet it. And that is really the story of the Ritz Carlton.

All too often we see something that works somewhere and we adopt what we see without really understanding the substance behind it.  For the past 20 years I have witnessed many main line denominational churches send committees out to study the exploding megachurch movement.  All come back with the outer cosmetic trappings. They change the music and often the ambiance but they never get to the deeper essence of what is really causing those churches to grow the way they do.

In the mid 1980’s, on behalf of my clients, I made a case study of the Ritz Carlton.  They were then, as they are now, extremely gracious.  It was entirely open book.  I was introduced to the whole story of blood, sweat and tears or rather the herculean 10 year single-minded effort of Horst Schulz and his merry band of executives as they set about changing the culture of the Ritz.  No small effort.

And that is really my point.  Adopting “country club manners” was only the visible part.  The focus and intentionality of achieving their vision was, by far, the most impressive.  You see, it is not enough at the Ritz Carlton to ACT like a lady or a gentleman.  You must actually BE a lady or a gentleman.  And that is the key to any successful organizational change.

Your DNA must change

My wife and I have become addicts of Masterpiece theater’s “Downton Abbey“.  In the presence of the Lords and Ladies the “help” puts on their best face.  But downstairs in the servant’s work area they are as dysfunctional as any funeral home staff I have ever met.  At the Ritz that would not be tolerated.  The turnover rate at the average hotel (luxury or otherwise) is startling high.  The Ritz turnover is a fraction of the industry average but it is still about 25%.  That is partly because at the Ritz if you can’t BE a lady or gentleman…you simply can’t stay.

Click here for a copy of the Ritz Carlton Values Card

Click here for a copy of the Ritz Carlton Baldridge Award Application

Lessons On Leadership: Peak Performance From Adequate People

Peter Drucker was the first to draw a parallel between Leadership and Orchestra Conductors when he observed:

“A great orchestra is not composed of great musicians but of adequate ones who produce at their peak. [A great conductor] has to make productive what he has…the players are nearly unchangeable.  So it is the conductor’s people skills that make the difference.”

What makes this particularly applicable to DeathCare is that our workers are not factory line workers as current trends in funeral home supervision and management are beginning to treat them. They are knowledge workers and in this same essay Drucker went on to say:

“The critical feature of a knowledge workforce is that its workers are not labor, they are capital.”

The success of any business is in how it invests its capital and if our workforce is our capital and we manage them like machines in a knowledge environment we are likely to lose. If, instead like the great conductors in this video, we begin to create the environment, the structure and the mechanisms that enable adequate people to continuously operate at their peak then we will realize a 100-fold return on our investment.
But, I fear this video may be too subtle for many in the profession to fully grasp what Mr. Talgam is trying to convey. In essence, his point about enabling the players to tell their own story and thereby become partners is really about building a team of collaborators around a central purpose and the conductor being a team leader.

Some Things To Note As You Watch:

Itay Talgam takes us through the entire progression of management as it develops from the “micro-manager” as represented by Riccardo Muti to what Jim Collins (author of the book: “Good To Great”) refers to as a LEVEL V leader as represented by Leonard Bernstein.

Note the fate of Riccardo Muti

This video is 20 minutes and you may be tempted to stop but HERE IS WHAT I REALLY WANT YOU TO DO:

As you watch the video and as Talgam describes the leadership style of each conductor try and decide where you fit.  If you are an employee, what is your bosses style?

“[A conductor’s] happiness does not come from only his own story and his joy of the music. The joy is about enabling other people’s stories to be heard at the same time.” (Itay Talgam)

How Leonard Bernstein managed to get adequate people to perform at their peak:

My bet is that he did not overpay people.  In fact, compensation probably didn’t have much to do with it.  But I do believe the following components were key factors:

  • He set clear expectations
  • He set personal goals for each player and enabled them to develop
  • He gave regular and speedy feedback
  • He worked one-on-one and in teams
  • He did not accept mediocrity and would not let individuals accept it either
  • Everyone knew how they contributed and they were important to the team
  • Everyone knew they were cared about
  • He took obvious pleasure in THEIR success

Final thought:  Can you imagine the sublime ecstasy Mr. Bernstein experiences in enabling ADEQUATE PEOPLE to accomplish a SUPERIOR PERFORMANCE.

THAT IS A LEVEL V LEADER.

If you want to know what a LEVEL V leader is then take another 2 1/2 minutes and watch this last video

Managers Vs. Leaders: Which Are You?

As a student of leadership and as a “Benchmark” Assessor for the Center for Creative Leadership, I am well aware of the impact poor leadership has on results.  The problem, in my mind, is the historical emphasis on styles more appropriate to factory settings than businesses that actually interface with the public.

The difference between a manager and a leader is significant and that point is often missed.  Both are responsible for accomplishing goals but one has a greater responsibility of setting goals than the other.  Both are responsible for optimizing performance but one is focused almost entirely on the day to day while the other must balance the day to day with the bigger picture of how to prepare for the future.

The dysfunctionality of the manufacturing style of managing has been widely known for at least two decades.  It gets work done but does not optimize performance.  As Drucker says so eloquently:  It creates “job impoverishment, not job enrichment”.   Building a team of high performers is quickly becoming one of the Critical Keys to Success for all businesses but even more so for DeathCare.

I am a “semi fan” of Seth Godin’s.  As a rule ranters make me uncomfortable.  But I subscribe to his blog because every six weeks or so he coughs up a gem and this link is one.  It will take you two minutes so  Click here to read it for yourself.

Are You Too Proud to Succeed?

A problem, certainly not unique to DeathCare but just as certainly profoundly prevalent, is an artificial sense of professionalism.  Born out of defining success by what people might think of us, it blocks our ability to succeed by making us unwilling to “Stoop To Greatness”.

I just received this two page post from Patrick Lencioni’s blog: “Point of View”.  You can subscribe by clicking here. Lencioni is one of the foremost authors of management books in the U.S.  You will recognize “Death By Meeting”; “Silos, Politics and Turf Wars” and, my favorite, “The Five Dysfunctions of A Team.” Virtually all his writing deals with human relations and how to help people be more effective.

His comments should give us all pause to reflect:

Stooping to Greatness

Earlier this year I had the opportunity to spend time with the CEO of one of America’s most successful companies, a legendary organization known for its employee and customer satisfaction, as well as its financial performance. I attended their company’s management conference, listened to various presentations about their culture, and the extraordinary, homey and sometimes slightly wacky practices that distinguish them from their competitors.

Overwhelmed by the organization’s simple and powerful behavioral philosophy, I asked the CEO a semi-rhetorical question. “Why in the world don’t your competitors do any of this?” The CEO thought about it for a moment and said, “You know, I honestly believe they think it’s beneath them.”

And right away, I knew he was right.

After all, every one of those competitors, the vast majority of whom are struggling, knows exactly what this company does, how it works, and how much it has driven its financial success. The company’s cultural approach has been chronicled in more than a few books. And yet, none of them tries to emulate it. In fact, based on numerous interactions I’ve had with employees who work for those competitors, I’d have to say that their attitude is often dismissive, even derisive, toward this company and its enthusiastic employees.

And this dynamic exists in other industries, too. A fast-food company I know has remarkable customer loyalty, as well as unbelievable employee satisfaction and retention, especially compared to the majority of their competitors. The leaders and employees of the company attribute most of their success to the behavioral philosophy and attitude that they’ve cultivated within the organization, and the unconventional yet effective activities that result.

One example of that philosophy is the action of the CEO, who shows up at grand openings of new franchises where he stays up all night with employees, playing instruments and handing out food to excited customers. Few CEOs would be happy, or even willing, to do things like this, but this executive relishes the opportunity. These, and other activities that most MBAs would call corny, are precisely what makes that company unique.

This happens in the world of sports, as well. There is a well-known high school football team where I live that is ranked near the top of national polls every year. They play the best teams in the country, teams with bigger and more highly touted players, and beat them regularly. The secret to their success, more than any game strategy or weight-lifting regimen, comes down to the coach’s philosophy about commitment and teamwork and the buy-in he gets from his players. That philosophy manifests itself in a variety of simple actions which speak to how the players treat one another on and off the field. For example, players pair up every week and exchange 3×5 cards with hand-written commitments around training and personal improvement, and then take responsibility for disciplining one another when those commitments aren’t met.

And yet, whenever I explain this and similar practices of the team to other coaches who are curious about their success, I encounter that same sense of dismissiveness. They get a look on their face that seems to say, “listen, I’m not going to do that. It’s silly. Just tell me something technical that I can use.” As a result, few teams actually try to copy them.

Some skeptics might say, “come on, those companies/teams are successful because they’re good at what they do.” And they’d be right. Those organizations are undoubtedly and extremely competent in their given fields, and they have to be in order to succeed. But plenty of other organizations are just as competent and don’t achieve great levels of success, and I honestly believe it’s because they’re unwilling to stoop down and do the simple, emotional, home-spun things that all human beings — employees, customers, players — really crave.

What’s at the heart of this unwillingness? I think it’s pride. Though plenty of people in the world say they want to be successful, not that many are willing to humble themselves and do the simple things that might seem unsophisticated. Essentially, they come to define success by what people think of them, rather than by what they accomplish, which is ironic because they often end up losing the admiration of their employees and customers/fans.

The good news in all of this is that for those organizations that want to succeed more than they want to maintain some artificial sense of professionalism (whatever that means), there is great opportunity for competitive advantage and success. They can create a culture of performance and service and employee engagement, the kind that ensures long term success like no strategy ever could. But only if they’re willing to stoop down and be human, to treat their customers and one another in ways that others might find corny.

Best,

Patrick Lencioni

The Tyranny of the Ten Call Man

A Management lesson from the bible

One of the most common and pervasive staffing problems in funeral service is the man or woman who undermines almost every current and future issue management tries to address.  They are the “Mayor of the Prep Room”.  No matter what initiative you attempt, they quietly work behind the scenes to undo it.  Sometimes they employ a subtle mechanism I call being “cooperatively uncooperative”.  This means giving the appearance of being on board but quietly “forgetting” to do what they have promised.  Worse they are absolute geniuses in providing what seem reasonable excuses why exceptions must be made.   As “Mayor of the Prep Room” every attempt to communicate to staff is answered by a meeting after the meeting where they hold forth on “what we are really going to do.”  The worst of them are blatant about simply ignoring expectations and just doing things the way they want rather than the way the are asked to do them.  Effectively daring management to “Make Me.”

An example is worthwhile.  Recently the more progressive funeral homes have implemented monthly, weekly and even daily staff meetings.  Attendance is mandatory.  Yet every owner that has been successful in establishing regular meetings has shared with me that it meant they had to chase down and face down at least one staff member repeatedly to make them attend.  Many owners and managers simply gave up trying and either exempted them or stopped having meetings.  This obviously caused other employees to lose heart and wonder (sometimes openly) who was really running the business.   Formal power said the owner –but informal power didn’t agree.

Why do owners and managers allow this behavior?  They say that it’s because they believe the person is too valuable to lose.   They have convinced themselves that they would lose 10, 20 or 30 calls.  And maybe they would.  But over time the lack of progress in responding to the many challenges we face and the loss of employee morale (not to mention the loss of owner morale) cost much much more than the loss of those calls.  I call these trouble makers “ten call men” because the owners live in daily fear they control that many calls.

I don’t like “ten call men” because they arrogantly wield informal power and prevent opportunity without assuming any risk.  They play owners and managers like puppets.

Jim Collins, in his “must-read” book, “Good To Great” makes this observation about them:

“We have a wrong person on the bus and we know it. Yet we wait, we delay, we try alternatives, we give a third and fourth chance…we build little systems to compensate for shortcomings…We find our energy diverted…that one person siphons energy away from developing and working with the right people.

Letting the wrong people hang around is unfair to the right people…

The reason we wait too long often has less to do with concern for that person than our own convenience…Meanwhile all the other people are still wondering: ‘when are you going to do something about this?'”

It is not unusual in my consulting practice to find inspiration in The Bible.  On more than one occasion a verse from Proverbs has enabled clients to take long delayed but desperately needed action:

“Cast out the scorner and contention will go out; yea strife and reproach shall cease”                  Proverbs 22:10