Executive leadership implications abound within the following post. Since readers are accomplished, intelligent minds, we’ll let you decide how each “trend and truth” applies to your situation.
Mammon vs. Chicken Little -- “Stay alive until ’05,” a phrase coined during the last recession, will give way to “Let’s get rich in ’06.” Judging from what we’ve seen over the past two quarters, this attitude is beginning to prevail. The only deterrent may be Chicken Little types who remain convinced that the economic sky is falling despite evidence to the contrary. Incredibly, some polls indicate that 43 percent of the general public thinks the economy is in recession, up from 36 percent last year during the presidential campaign. Here’s a clear message: Step up, business leaders and show confidence. Simply rolling over in your own selfish interest is no longer an option.
Stay ahead of the money -- Unprecedented amounts of capital, mainly cash from corporate income sheets and private investors, will continue to be deployed at dizzying rates across new markets that few even thought existed. Look for relatively unknown enterprises to step out and make even more impact in the coming year. Those who stay ahead of versus following the money will enjoy competitive advantage.
Here today, gone tomorrow -- The adage, “go where the business is” will become even more predominant. Stable and long-term business sources will continue to give way to reinvention. Volatility and rapid change aren’t going away anytime soon.
The Corner Office myth -- In a recent profile titled, “The Corner Office,” The New York Times reported at length about how major corporate leaders are no longer solely products of elite universities and institutions. Valid point, flawed premise. If you run across a CEO who hides in a corner office, then please report him or her to the nearest governance authority. Chances are they’re not real and may be missing the biggest point of all: The position isn’t about entirely about THEM. It’s about unlocking the potential of others to achieve great things. Same goes for those who purportedly serve them despite evidence to the contrary. The ones that continue to believe in the Corner Office are the same individuals who cling to the notion that there’s a “seat at the table” waiting for them one day.
One last point: For those who continue to lack courage with adopting point of view on issues beyond what’s directly in front of them, please take a moment to expand your universe. Your constituencies have had enough with platitudes, slang, clichés, B-school babble and other self serving nonsense that tells them nothing beyond what they already know or hear from other sources. Heed the call. Leave the comfort zone. It’s time to lead in a personally genuine and authentic manner.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
Sunday, December 04, 2005
Thursday, October 27, 2005
Leaders & Laggards
"Leaders & Laggards” is a periodic series that examines the best and worst of business leadership.
Leaders:
Eric Schmidt, CEO, Google. The newly public company wants to offer more access to published works using its famous Internet search technology. Schmidt publicly defended the company’s motives in a Wall Street Journal Op-ed (“Books of Revelation,” October 18), and after reading his piece and others, it’s hard not to give a big leadership nod. This stand isn’t without controversy. But at least it’s a stand. That’s more than what can be said for a majority of businesses.
Sheldon Adelson, Las Vegas investor and developer. Adelson is an entrepreneur for the ages. Here’s an excerpt from a recent Fortune (“The Man with the Golden Gut,” October 17) profile: “Businesses are like buses. You stand on a corner and you don’t like where that one is going? Wait…take another. There’s no end to buses or businesses.” It’s too bad more can’t heed this call. There’s immense insight into this simple rule.
Lee Scott, CEO, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. Ok, so the big box retailer hasn’t won many fans or friends alike in the corporate reputation category. No argument there. But what a difference a few months make. Between Katrina hurricane response and Scott’s latest request to boost the minimum wage, it looks as though the point-of-view gods have finally found where America shops. Next test: Standing up to the obesity crowd over hiring practices.
Laggards:
Joe Galli, outgoing CEO, Newell Rubbermaid. For anyone that had to suffer through one of his presentations or direct interactions, it’s no surprise that Galli is the latest CEO casualty. His track record boils down to this key fact: 10 quarters of sales declines despite some of the world’s greatest brands, including Sharpie. How do you manage that? Where was the board?
Phillip R. Bennett, former chairman and CEO, Refco. This individual, with help from his own funny loans and greedy investors, managed to lead the commodity trading giant right into bankruptcy. Our only question: Wasn’t there a good reason why we had never heard of Bennett outside Wall Street? Here’s hoping we won’t hear anymore soon. Refco sounds too much like the former Revco, which now operates as CVS.
Brand Atlanta. Since we don’t know whom to single out, the entire status quo complex will have to do. Branding may give rise to brand in some cases, but in the end, logos, jingles and ads don’t replace a unique promise or commitment. And while it pains us to say, the three O-rings – Opportunity, Optimism and Openness– don’t deliver anything concrete. As to the pre-game performance on Monday Night Football that no one outside Atlanta saw, well… Here’s a suggested slogan: “Atlanta, the City Too Busy to Change.”
The Pointe is produced by Point of View, LLC, an executive leadership brand consultancy based in Atlanta. For related background, please contact Jeremy Garlington, 404-606-0637, garlingtons@msn.com or visit http://www.povblogger.blogspot.com/.
Leaders:
Eric Schmidt, CEO, Google. The newly public company wants to offer more access to published works using its famous Internet search technology. Schmidt publicly defended the company’s motives in a Wall Street Journal Op-ed (“Books of Revelation,” October 18), and after reading his piece and others, it’s hard not to give a big leadership nod. This stand isn’t without controversy. But at least it’s a stand. That’s more than what can be said for a majority of businesses.
Sheldon Adelson, Las Vegas investor and developer. Adelson is an entrepreneur for the ages. Here’s an excerpt from a recent Fortune (“The Man with the Golden Gut,” October 17) profile: “Businesses are like buses. You stand on a corner and you don’t like where that one is going? Wait…take another. There’s no end to buses or businesses.” It’s too bad more can’t heed this call. There’s immense insight into this simple rule.
Lee Scott, CEO, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. Ok, so the big box retailer hasn’t won many fans or friends alike in the corporate reputation category. No argument there. But what a difference a few months make. Between Katrina hurricane response and Scott’s latest request to boost the minimum wage, it looks as though the point-of-view gods have finally found where America shops. Next test: Standing up to the obesity crowd over hiring practices.
Laggards:
Joe Galli, outgoing CEO, Newell Rubbermaid. For anyone that had to suffer through one of his presentations or direct interactions, it’s no surprise that Galli is the latest CEO casualty. His track record boils down to this key fact: 10 quarters of sales declines despite some of the world’s greatest brands, including Sharpie. How do you manage that? Where was the board?
Phillip R. Bennett, former chairman and CEO, Refco. This individual, with help from his own funny loans and greedy investors, managed to lead the commodity trading giant right into bankruptcy. Our only question: Wasn’t there a good reason why we had never heard of Bennett outside Wall Street? Here’s hoping we won’t hear anymore soon. Refco sounds too much like the former Revco, which now operates as CVS.
Brand Atlanta. Since we don’t know whom to single out, the entire status quo complex will have to do. Branding may give rise to brand in some cases, but in the end, logos, jingles and ads don’t replace a unique promise or commitment. And while it pains us to say, the three O-rings – Opportunity, Optimism and Openness– don’t deliver anything concrete. As to the pre-game performance on Monday Night Football that no one outside Atlanta saw, well… Here’s a suggested slogan: “Atlanta, the City Too Busy to Change.”
The Pointe is produced by Point of View, LLC, an executive leadership brand consultancy based in Atlanta. For related background, please contact Jeremy Garlington, 404-606-0637, garlingtons@msn.com or visit http://www.povblogger.blogspot.com/.
Monday, September 19, 2005
Leadership and Pornography
The head of executive coaching at a renowned leadership development center recently conveyed: “Leadership is a lot like pornography -- you just know it when you see it.” Ok, 10 points for honesty.
However, this experience and other recent ones have shed light on an unfortunate truth: Leadership is often left to subjective opinion of those who don’t have a solid grasp of the term – sometimes through no fault of their own. There is no governing body or institution that grants leadership status, nor is there any widely held standard. Particularly not in corporate or business circles.
Some may say, “hey, wait a second, doesn’t that represent an opportunity for coaches and consultants touting themselves as leadership experts (present company included?)”
Well, yes and no. Yes, ambiguity always represents opportunity. But no, that doesn’t mean the same opportunity always affords unique status.
We prefer to think of leadership as “unlocking the potential success of others and helping others realize their own success no matter what shape or form.”
Apply this definition to the recently benched head of FEMA emergency operations in Louisiana, and you’ll see quite clearly that Michael Brown didn’t put anyone in position to succeed, much less answer the immediate call either visibly or forcefully. If this is too political for your taste, then consider self-acclaimed corporate leaders active within your sector. What do you look for that defines leadership? If it’s not something that resembles the previous definition, then chances are it’s not leadership.
Considering what we’re currently living through at home and abroad, we may want to expand the definition of leadership to include “instilling a certainty of hope” that success can be achieved despite what may seem like insurmountable odds.
So if you want to be a leader, help others succeed with tangible deeds, not just words or clichés. And while you do, give candid advice and direction, which if the context allows, provides a certainty of hope. The results may surprise you.
However, this experience and other recent ones have shed light on an unfortunate truth: Leadership is often left to subjective opinion of those who don’t have a solid grasp of the term – sometimes through no fault of their own. There is no governing body or institution that grants leadership status, nor is there any widely held standard. Particularly not in corporate or business circles.
Some may say, “hey, wait a second, doesn’t that represent an opportunity for coaches and consultants touting themselves as leadership experts (present company included?)”
Well, yes and no. Yes, ambiguity always represents opportunity. But no, that doesn’t mean the same opportunity always affords unique status.
We prefer to think of leadership as “unlocking the potential success of others and helping others realize their own success no matter what shape or form.”
Apply this definition to the recently benched head of FEMA emergency operations in Louisiana, and you’ll see quite clearly that Michael Brown didn’t put anyone in position to succeed, much less answer the immediate call either visibly or forcefully. If this is too political for your taste, then consider self-acclaimed corporate leaders active within your sector. What do you look for that defines leadership? If it’s not something that resembles the previous definition, then chances are it’s not leadership.
Considering what we’re currently living through at home and abroad, we may want to expand the definition of leadership to include “instilling a certainty of hope” that success can be achieved despite what may seem like insurmountable odds.
So if you want to be a leader, help others succeed with tangible deeds, not just words or clichés. And while you do, give candid advice and direction, which if the context allows, provides a certainty of hope. The results may surprise you.
Monday, August 01, 2005
Be Who You Are
A refrain from executives struggling with leadership issues has become all too common: “This position isn’t connecting my personal and business purpose. In fact, it’s doing quite the opposite.”
Self-reflection can be felt everywhere, which is probably typical during summer when business activity slows, and executives have too much extra time on their hands.
However, before anyone dismisses this condition due to only seasonality, it’s worth a closer look.
We all work hard to achieve what we think is success. Salary, status, position, and for the lucky few, making a difference. It’s what business thrives upon and for good measure. Profits have a way of funding dreams and ambitions as well as creating immense wealth for individuals and local communities.
Yet the fact remains that much of what business depends on eats away at our inner core over time. CEOs who become CEOs because that’s all they ever wanted suddenly realize that the position isn’t always what it’s stacked up to be. This realization is compounded by heavy demands, which we read about at ad nauseam in the press.
So what’s an aspiring leader to do? Well, the first step is to quit spitting out clichés or “pie in the sky” anecdotes from business books. Jack Welch may have a great point of view, but the fact is it may not apply to you or your organization’s situation. A far better use of time is to adapt your own situation to what the current environment demands. It may mean giving up a distinguished role or control over time to go a different route. For others it may mean adding interests or activities outside of work that complement the current range of motivations, desires and time demands. Some may even decide their calling is to make others better in their organizations vs. only advancing themselves.
What shouldn’t you do? Quit something proven without having a related capacity formed, both in your mind and in real practice. Try to be someone who you aren’t, or worse yet, focus on things that don’t come naturally to the point where it’s obvious.
If you’re a self-promotional genius who wants to be a rock star, then don’t try to come across as a benevolent leader. Transparency will unwind your act. Vice versa, if you’re an unassuming type who feels called to lead, then use those traits to your advantage. In short, dare to be who you are.
Self-reflection can be felt everywhere, which is probably typical during summer when business activity slows, and executives have too much extra time on their hands.
However, before anyone dismisses this condition due to only seasonality, it’s worth a closer look.
We all work hard to achieve what we think is success. Salary, status, position, and for the lucky few, making a difference. It’s what business thrives upon and for good measure. Profits have a way of funding dreams and ambitions as well as creating immense wealth for individuals and local communities.
Yet the fact remains that much of what business depends on eats away at our inner core over time. CEOs who become CEOs because that’s all they ever wanted suddenly realize that the position isn’t always what it’s stacked up to be. This realization is compounded by heavy demands, which we read about at ad nauseam in the press.
So what’s an aspiring leader to do? Well, the first step is to quit spitting out clichés or “pie in the sky” anecdotes from business books. Jack Welch may have a great point of view, but the fact is it may not apply to you or your organization’s situation. A far better use of time is to adapt your own situation to what the current environment demands. It may mean giving up a distinguished role or control over time to go a different route. For others it may mean adding interests or activities outside of work that complement the current range of motivations, desires and time demands. Some may even decide their calling is to make others better in their organizations vs. only advancing themselves.
What shouldn’t you do? Quit something proven without having a related capacity formed, both in your mind and in real practice. Try to be someone who you aren’t, or worse yet, focus on things that don’t come naturally to the point where it’s obvious.
If you’re a self-promotional genius who wants to be a rock star, then don’t try to come across as a benevolent leader. Transparency will unwind your act. Vice versa, if you’re an unassuming type who feels called to lead, then use those traits to your advantage. In short, dare to be who you are.
Monday, June 27, 2005
In Position to Win
Watching the U.S. Open unfold recently first-hand, my mind couldn’t help but race to leadership, brand, etc. It had nothing to do with Donald Trump, although he was strangely just another face in the crowd during the first round. Nor did it have much to do with Tiger Woods’ golf ball, which, on an errant drive, rolled to our feet, flashing the famous Nike Swoosh.
No, actually, the point is much simpler. And while it pertains to Tiger, it’s not about branding symbols despite what many continue to believe at their own peril.
Anyone who watched the U.S. Open from start to finish could never have predicted the outcome. But they could predict with relative certainty that Tiger would be in a position to win no matter what the circumstances. That’s what makes him great.
How many business leaders or companies can say the same thing? It’s not entirely about winning, with respect to Jack Welch’s recent book, “Winning.” It’s more about being in a position to win without being self-consumed at all costs. Wins will always come when you’re in a position to win, yet the vice versa doesn’t always hold true.
The sports world is literally filled with examples to make this point. George Steinbrenner, who has experienced his fair share of winning as owner of the New York Yankees, will never go down as a highly selfless figure when it’s all said and done. Perhaps admired from afar but never selfless, or the opposite of self-consumed.
Bobby Cox, manager of the Atlanta Braves, will leave an indelible mark, mainly because he always tries to put others in a position to win (ok, not always in the post-season but that’s not pertinent here.) So will Joe Torre, Nolan Ryan and Cal Ripken, Jr. Not Pete Rose, Kobe Bryant or any other selfish overpaid star unwilling to sacrifice their own ego for the greater whole.
Please don’t mistake this as an excuse to lose or lack the “eye of the tiger” to win (no pun intended.) To the contrary, it’s more about putting yourself in more situations where you can win versus winning at all times and costs.
The position that you occupy in other people’s minds and how you use that position defines your leadership brand. And while we all can’t be Tiger Woods, if more business leaders put themselves in better position to win, then everyone’s interests would be much better served.
No, actually, the point is much simpler. And while it pertains to Tiger, it’s not about branding symbols despite what many continue to believe at their own peril.
Anyone who watched the U.S. Open from start to finish could never have predicted the outcome. But they could predict with relative certainty that Tiger would be in a position to win no matter what the circumstances. That’s what makes him great.
How many business leaders or companies can say the same thing? It’s not entirely about winning, with respect to Jack Welch’s recent book, “Winning.” It’s more about being in a position to win without being self-consumed at all costs. Wins will always come when you’re in a position to win, yet the vice versa doesn’t always hold true.
The sports world is literally filled with examples to make this point. George Steinbrenner, who has experienced his fair share of winning as owner of the New York Yankees, will never go down as a highly selfless figure when it’s all said and done. Perhaps admired from afar but never selfless, or the opposite of self-consumed.
Bobby Cox, manager of the Atlanta Braves, will leave an indelible mark, mainly because he always tries to put others in a position to win (ok, not always in the post-season but that’s not pertinent here.) So will Joe Torre, Nolan Ryan and Cal Ripken, Jr. Not Pete Rose, Kobe Bryant or any other selfish overpaid star unwilling to sacrifice their own ego for the greater whole.
Please don’t mistake this as an excuse to lose or lack the “eye of the tiger” to win (no pun intended.) To the contrary, it’s more about putting yourself in more situations where you can win versus winning at all times and costs.
The position that you occupy in other people’s minds and how you use that position defines your leadership brand. And while we all can’t be Tiger Woods, if more business leaders put themselves in better position to win, then everyone’s interests would be much better served.
Monday, June 06, 2005
What is my Solstice?
The Summer Solstice officially begins at 2:46 A.M., EDT on Tuesday, June 21.
Solstice comes from the Latin -- sol, sun; sistit, stands. Several days before and after the longest day of the year, the sun appears to stand still in the sky.
So what, you may ask?
If the sun unceasingly commits itself to standing for something, then shouldn’t you consider the same? Ask yourself. What is my Solstice?
It’s a question that every self-ascribed leader should be asking himself or herself this summer season. There are no right or wrong answers, but if you can’t honestly ask yourself the question, then leadership may be more elusive than you think.
Solstice comes from the Latin -- sol, sun; sistit, stands. Several days before and after the longest day of the year, the sun appears to stand still in the sky.
So what, you may ask?
If the sun unceasingly commits itself to standing for something, then shouldn’t you consider the same? Ask yourself. What is my Solstice?
It’s a question that every self-ascribed leader should be asking himself or herself this summer season. There are no right or wrong answers, but if you can’t honestly ask yourself the question, then leadership may be more elusive than you think.
Monday, May 16, 2005
Leaders & Laggards
“Leaders & Laggards” is a periodic series that examines individual corporate leaders who have used strong views and values to impact positive action versus those whom have not.
Leaders:
Tom Chapman, Chairman & CEO, Equifax. In a bold Old School Strikes Back move, Chapman and his PR team penned a piece on identity theft for The Wall Street Journal. It’s hard to tell where Chapman’s true interests lie – isn’t he supposed to be retiring? But CEOs taking strong stands on difficult issues are always worth applauding. Even outgoing ones nicknamed the General.
Kevin Rollins, President & CEO, Dell Computer Corp. Rollins represents the opposite of what many perceive to be leadership brand. Under-stated, subjugated ego, long-time number two, etc. But that’s just the point. Rather than making things all about himself, Rollins simply leads, clarifies and executes. Results speak volumes.
Jeff Brotman, CEO, Costco. Great company, unknown leader. See a pattern forming here? Brotman’s lazer-like focus on the small business customer has propelled Costco way past Wal-Mart/Sam Club’s. Triple the profits with 218 fewer stores. A quote from a recent Business 2.0 profile says it all: “We want to be great in 50 years.” When was the last time you heard any CEO stand for something like that?
Laggards:
Saul Palmisano, CEO, IBM. Faulty execution. Playing the blame game. Hiding out in North Charleston, S.C., for the annual meeting. IBM shareholders will soon break out into song, “Bring Back Lou (Gerstner) to run Big Blue.” The company’s newest branding gimmickry, “The Other IBM,” deserves words, too, but we’re out of room and patience.
Richard Reese, CEO, Iron Mountain. Gee, Wally, the turnips did fall off the truck this time. Not once but twice. In case you’re not familiar with Reese and Iron Mountain, consider Bank of America and Time Warner’s recent bouts with lost customer data. Iron Mountain physically lost back-up tapes in both cases on separate deliveries. No wonder demand exists for more secure, encrypted data transmission. A rare Laggard kudos should be granted, however, for Iron Mountain’s effective crisis management. There probably isn’t anyone outside technology circles that recognizes the company or leader.
Steve Jobs. Many will recognize this household name as a technology and innovation icon. Too bad he isn’t similarly versed in the Constitution. Proving once again that even great ones can have their moments, Jobs has been fighting to have an unflattering biography removed from bookstore shelves, including copies at Apple Computer retail stores. No books have been burned yet that we know of. Perhaps they’re just waiting for the downloadable version on their iPod?
The Pointe is produced by Point of View, LLC, a leadership brand consultancy in Atlanta. For related background, please contact Jeremy Garlington, 404-606-0637, garlingtons@msn.com or visit www.povblogger.blogspot.com.
Leaders:
Tom Chapman, Chairman & CEO, Equifax. In a bold Old School Strikes Back move, Chapman and his PR team penned a piece on identity theft for The Wall Street Journal. It’s hard to tell where Chapman’s true interests lie – isn’t he supposed to be retiring? But CEOs taking strong stands on difficult issues are always worth applauding. Even outgoing ones nicknamed the General.
Kevin Rollins, President & CEO, Dell Computer Corp. Rollins represents the opposite of what many perceive to be leadership brand. Under-stated, subjugated ego, long-time number two, etc. But that’s just the point. Rather than making things all about himself, Rollins simply leads, clarifies and executes. Results speak volumes.
Jeff Brotman, CEO, Costco. Great company, unknown leader. See a pattern forming here? Brotman’s lazer-like focus on the small business customer has propelled Costco way past Wal-Mart/Sam Club’s. Triple the profits with 218 fewer stores. A quote from a recent Business 2.0 profile says it all: “We want to be great in 50 years.” When was the last time you heard any CEO stand for something like that?
Laggards:
Saul Palmisano, CEO, IBM. Faulty execution. Playing the blame game. Hiding out in North Charleston, S.C., for the annual meeting. IBM shareholders will soon break out into song, “Bring Back Lou (Gerstner) to run Big Blue.” The company’s newest branding gimmickry, “The Other IBM,” deserves words, too, but we’re out of room and patience.
Richard Reese, CEO, Iron Mountain. Gee, Wally, the turnips did fall off the truck this time. Not once but twice. In case you’re not familiar with Reese and Iron Mountain, consider Bank of America and Time Warner’s recent bouts with lost customer data. Iron Mountain physically lost back-up tapes in both cases on separate deliveries. No wonder demand exists for more secure, encrypted data transmission. A rare Laggard kudos should be granted, however, for Iron Mountain’s effective crisis management. There probably isn’t anyone outside technology circles that recognizes the company or leader.
Steve Jobs. Many will recognize this household name as a technology and innovation icon. Too bad he isn’t similarly versed in the Constitution. Proving once again that even great ones can have their moments, Jobs has been fighting to have an unflattering biography removed from bookstore shelves, including copies at Apple Computer retail stores. No books have been burned yet that we know of. Perhaps they’re just waiting for the downloadable version on their iPod?
The Pointe is produced by Point of View, LLC, a leadership brand consultancy in Atlanta. For related background, please contact Jeremy Garlington, 404-606-0637, garlingtons@msn.com or visit www.povblogger.blogspot.com.
Friday, April 29, 2005
Why Mission Statements Fall Short
Blogger's Note: Column previously published in James Magazine
Someone needs to tell Alpharetta-based ChoicePoint that it’s time for a new mission statement.
“To be the most admired information company worldwide” rings hollow considering their current challenges with identity theft. At least they didn’t use “trusted” in place of ‘admired.’
Ok, sorry. Rather than beat up on an obvious suspect, consider a few reasons why mission statements nearly always fall short.
The first reason is broken process. Here’s how it generally works. A company CEO gets fed up with morale being “in the tank” and decides it’s time to rev up the troops. So he or she calls in a subordinate and/or outside consultant and instructs them to develop a statement that says what the company aspires to be, i.e., its vision, and how the company will achieve that vision, i.e., mission. Not much thought is given to what an intended audience may think or feel.
If those tasked with the challenge are true professionals, they’ll conduct some level of research via surveys, focus groups and/or employee interviews to gauge sentiment. Then they’ll pore over findings to decipher what will resonate. They may even test a few terms with a small control group to see what connects at a personal level.
This is where the process generally starts breaking down. Instead of thinking broadly, the mission team rushes to produce a few blanket statements solely for high-level review. Everyone proceeds to wordsmith the potential statements to death. Then, presto, there’s a mission. CEO says, “Put it on the web, send the email out and tell everyone we’ve got a mission! Project managers pat themselves on the back and sit back waiting for the mission to take hold.
The only problem is it never does, and the reasons why are never obvious.
When Lou Gerstner took over as IBM’s CEO in 1993, one of his first memorable lines was, “the last thing we need here is another vision.” What Gerstner found isn’t uncommon. The organization was literally awash in too much process and disparate agendas. They had lost track with what they were and had no idea what they were going to be.
Instead of crafting another mission statement, Gerstner led an effort to find specific focus. The company coined the term, “e-commerce” after months of review and team-based vetting. While this move was one of many, the end result was momentum behind one of the greatest corporate turnarounds in history.
Obviously most companies can’t buy their way into a new arena like IBM did. But that’s not the point. IBM took the time to find focus around what they were and weren’t vs. what they were trying to become. And they used simple, timely terminology that conveyed something unique about where the business was headed.
Others make the mistake of arriving at generic statements that severely lack differentiation. Law and accounting firms are notorious for this wrong-headed practice. “To be the biggest law firm in the world” can be found all too often. While a noble goal, is there anything truly unique about that line? Take the word, ‘law’ out, and it could be any firm in the world.
McKinsey & Co., one of the world’s most recognized business strategy consulting firms, originally focused on the “best and the brightest.” What began as a mission is now a steadfast principle. Despite recent stumbles, McKinsey has managed to weather the storm by remaining true to their original calling.
Boeing, another company in the news for stumbling recently, re-defines generic with, “People Working Together as a Global Enterprise for Aerospace Leadership.” Again, drop the word, “aerospace” and the description could fit nearly any company with worldwide presence.
So what does this mean to you and your company?
Effective mission statements can be a struggle. Most efforts fall short. But it’s not usually because of technical reasons.
Actions behind statements end up speaking much more loudly than words. If anyone influential during the initial stage says things like, “c’mon, it’s just a mission statement -- no one really cares,” then don’t bother with the exercise.
However, if a need exists to connect disparate groups and agreement can be reached on how to be specific, unique and energized, then try crafting a statement. Just make sure that the mission communicates unique benefits and relevance to customer, employees and other important constituencies. Then live by the words over time. Update only when absolutely necessary.
The power of many experiencing what you stand for can ultimately create immense value.
Someone needs to tell Alpharetta-based ChoicePoint that it’s time for a new mission statement.
“To be the most admired information company worldwide” rings hollow considering their current challenges with identity theft. At least they didn’t use “trusted” in place of ‘admired.’
Ok, sorry. Rather than beat up on an obvious suspect, consider a few reasons why mission statements nearly always fall short.
The first reason is broken process. Here’s how it generally works. A company CEO gets fed up with morale being “in the tank” and decides it’s time to rev up the troops. So he or she calls in a subordinate and/or outside consultant and instructs them to develop a statement that says what the company aspires to be, i.e., its vision, and how the company will achieve that vision, i.e., mission. Not much thought is given to what an intended audience may think or feel.
If those tasked with the challenge are true professionals, they’ll conduct some level of research via surveys, focus groups and/or employee interviews to gauge sentiment. Then they’ll pore over findings to decipher what will resonate. They may even test a few terms with a small control group to see what connects at a personal level.
This is where the process generally starts breaking down. Instead of thinking broadly, the mission team rushes to produce a few blanket statements solely for high-level review. Everyone proceeds to wordsmith the potential statements to death. Then, presto, there’s a mission. CEO says, “Put it on the web, send the email out and tell everyone we’ve got a mission! Project managers pat themselves on the back and sit back waiting for the mission to take hold.
The only problem is it never does, and the reasons why are never obvious.
When Lou Gerstner took over as IBM’s CEO in 1993, one of his first memorable lines was, “the last thing we need here is another vision.” What Gerstner found isn’t uncommon. The organization was literally awash in too much process and disparate agendas. They had lost track with what they were and had no idea what they were going to be.
Instead of crafting another mission statement, Gerstner led an effort to find specific focus. The company coined the term, “e-commerce” after months of review and team-based vetting. While this move was one of many, the end result was momentum behind one of the greatest corporate turnarounds in history.
Obviously most companies can’t buy their way into a new arena like IBM did. But that’s not the point. IBM took the time to find focus around what they were and weren’t vs. what they were trying to become. And they used simple, timely terminology that conveyed something unique about where the business was headed.
Others make the mistake of arriving at generic statements that severely lack differentiation. Law and accounting firms are notorious for this wrong-headed practice. “To be the biggest law firm in the world” can be found all too often. While a noble goal, is there anything truly unique about that line? Take the word, ‘law’ out, and it could be any firm in the world.
McKinsey & Co., one of the world’s most recognized business strategy consulting firms, originally focused on the “best and the brightest.” What began as a mission is now a steadfast principle. Despite recent stumbles, McKinsey has managed to weather the storm by remaining true to their original calling.
Boeing, another company in the news for stumbling recently, re-defines generic with, “People Working Together as a Global Enterprise for Aerospace Leadership.” Again, drop the word, “aerospace” and the description could fit nearly any company with worldwide presence.
So what does this mean to you and your company?
Effective mission statements can be a struggle. Most efforts fall short. But it’s not usually because of technical reasons.
Actions behind statements end up speaking much more loudly than words. If anyone influential during the initial stage says things like, “c’mon, it’s just a mission statement -- no one really cares,” then don’t bother with the exercise.
However, if a need exists to connect disparate groups and agreement can be reached on how to be specific, unique and energized, then try crafting a statement. Just make sure that the mission communicates unique benefits and relevance to customer, employees and other important constituencies. Then live by the words over time. Update only when absolutely necessary.
The power of many experiencing what you stand for can ultimately create immense value.
Monday, April 11, 2005
Ego vs. Conscience
It’s tempting to over-simplify what we read, see and hear every day. So we’ll try not to. Any discerning leader, however, could gain a lot by viewing their experiences through ego vs. conscience, both personally and existentially.
In “The Eighth Habit,” Stephen Covey makes clear distinctions between the two terms: Ego focuses on one’s own survival, pleasure and enhancement to the exclusion of others and is selfishly ambitious…Conscience, on the other hand, both democratizes and elevates ego to a larger sense of the group, whole, community, in short, the greater good. It sees life in terms of service and commitment…
Now, let’s consider these terms taking into account the latest high-profile CEO hubris.
No one would argue that former AIG Chairman and CEO Hank Greenberg lacked ego. But would they stop to consider whether his conscience, at different points, kept up with or outpaced his ego? Or that he needed ego to accomplish what he wanted to? Probably not. In the final measure, it’s all about where the balance lies by today’s standard. In Greenberg’s case, bad accounting may have been the smoking gun, but in the long run, failure to adapt to changing circumstances, or not sacrificing ego, is what did him in.
Turning to Morgan Stanley and its embattled CEO Phil Purcell, this dispute has all the factors associated with ego gone wild: Warring factions, dissident shareholders, hawkish hedge funds, etc. You name the factor, and this Wall Street power struggle has it. At no point has conscience reared its head. The board’s decision to spin-off the Discover unit might have qualified if the move had not been perceived as a complete flip-flop or cave-in to ego-driven interests. Even the opposition, the Group of Eight, have crossed the line with a full-scale media attack. Journalists live for big conflict and personality clashes, and this one has both going on in full display.
Luckily, a majority can manage the positive side of ego, which doesn’t get a lot of attention these days. It’s our humble opinion that anyone trying to accomplish something larger than their own self interest not only needs but also requires healthy ego and ego renewal.
The trick, however, is to know when to say when, or as Covey puts it far better:
Ego is myopic and interprets all of life through its own agenda. Conscience is the social ecologist listening to and sensing the entire environment. It fills the body with light, is able to democratize ego to reflect more accurately the entire world.
That may sound a bit lofty even coming from a guru, but it’s worth a few moments of reflection prior to your next conquest.
In “The Eighth Habit,” Stephen Covey makes clear distinctions between the two terms: Ego focuses on one’s own survival, pleasure and enhancement to the exclusion of others and is selfishly ambitious…Conscience, on the other hand, both democratizes and elevates ego to a larger sense of the group, whole, community, in short, the greater good. It sees life in terms of service and commitment…
Now, let’s consider these terms taking into account the latest high-profile CEO hubris.
No one would argue that former AIG Chairman and CEO Hank Greenberg lacked ego. But would they stop to consider whether his conscience, at different points, kept up with or outpaced his ego? Or that he needed ego to accomplish what he wanted to? Probably not. In the final measure, it’s all about where the balance lies by today’s standard. In Greenberg’s case, bad accounting may have been the smoking gun, but in the long run, failure to adapt to changing circumstances, or not sacrificing ego, is what did him in.
Turning to Morgan Stanley and its embattled CEO Phil Purcell, this dispute has all the factors associated with ego gone wild: Warring factions, dissident shareholders, hawkish hedge funds, etc. You name the factor, and this Wall Street power struggle has it. At no point has conscience reared its head. The board’s decision to spin-off the Discover unit might have qualified if the move had not been perceived as a complete flip-flop or cave-in to ego-driven interests. Even the opposition, the Group of Eight, have crossed the line with a full-scale media attack. Journalists live for big conflict and personality clashes, and this one has both going on in full display.
Luckily, a majority can manage the positive side of ego, which doesn’t get a lot of attention these days. It’s our humble opinion that anyone trying to accomplish something larger than their own self interest not only needs but also requires healthy ego and ego renewal.
The trick, however, is to know when to say when, or as Covey puts it far better:
Ego is myopic and interprets all of life through its own agenda. Conscience is the social ecologist listening to and sensing the entire environment. It fills the body with light, is able to democratize ego to reflect more accurately the entire world.
That may sound a bit lofty even coming from a guru, but it’s worth a few moments of reflection prior to your next conquest.
Tuesday, March 08, 2005
Leaders & Laggards
“Leaders & Laggards” will examine individuals who have used strong views and values to impact positive action versus those who have not.
Leaders:
Charles Prince, Chairman & CEO, Citigroup. Prince has guided the poster child for Wall Street malfeasance back to respectability through both words and actions. His commitment to ethics via a five-point plan called, “Our Shared Responsibilities” has produced a sense that Citigroup is serious about restoring trust and credibility to the company’s sprawling brand. Prince also is matching these words with individual action through a range of related involvements and business gestures.
A.G. Lafley, Chairman & CEO, Proctor & Gamble. Lafley has taken P&G’s performance to new levels while emphasizing to multiple stakeholders how they’re becoming a “connect and develop” company vs. an “invent from within” company. Nowhere is that more relevant than the company’s $54 billion acquisition of Gillette and subsequent communications describing what the new combination will offer customers.
Martha Stewart. Ok, so prison has a way of straightening out even the most domesticated. Stewart, however, has done an about face with her own standing, which had previously been left in lawyers’ hands. Stewart’s re-emergence points to a fundamental principle: If you’re headed for trouble or an out-of-touch period, make sure there’s something reliable -- product, service or memorable characteristic -- that customers can fall back on during an interim period.
Laggards:
Derek Smith, Chairman and CEO, ChoicePoint. SEC & federal investigations, insider selling when the *&^% was hitting the fan, customer complaints, litigation, etc. Did it really have to be this way? And how come the company’s board hasn’t fired Smith or held itself accountable for the mess? For a company that doesn’t understand trust -- not customer information -- is its core asset, something desperately needs to give in this situation.
Bernie Ebbers and Scott Sullivan, former WorldCom villains. Here’s hoping these two clowns both get life sentences for dragging everyone back through their hopeless saga. It probably won’t happen, but if there was a lagging indicator in the market that no one wants to claim, then it’s the daily Executives on Trial drama.
Harry Stonecipher, President and CEO, Boeing. Make that former President and CEO. Lured out of retirement to help restore Boeing’s standing, Stonecipher has been fired for having an extramarital affair with a female employee. Ironically, he had been brought in to restore the company’s standing following previous scandals. Can we say ridiculously bad judgment? Congratulations to the company’s board for taking prompt action.
Leaders:
Charles Prince, Chairman & CEO, Citigroup. Prince has guided the poster child for Wall Street malfeasance back to respectability through both words and actions. His commitment to ethics via a five-point plan called, “Our Shared Responsibilities” has produced a sense that Citigroup is serious about restoring trust and credibility to the company’s sprawling brand. Prince also is matching these words with individual action through a range of related involvements and business gestures.
A.G. Lafley, Chairman & CEO, Proctor & Gamble. Lafley has taken P&G’s performance to new levels while emphasizing to multiple stakeholders how they’re becoming a “connect and develop” company vs. an “invent from within” company. Nowhere is that more relevant than the company’s $54 billion acquisition of Gillette and subsequent communications describing what the new combination will offer customers.
Martha Stewart. Ok, so prison has a way of straightening out even the most domesticated. Stewart, however, has done an about face with her own standing, which had previously been left in lawyers’ hands. Stewart’s re-emergence points to a fundamental principle: If you’re headed for trouble or an out-of-touch period, make sure there’s something reliable -- product, service or memorable characteristic -- that customers can fall back on during an interim period.
Laggards:
Derek Smith, Chairman and CEO, ChoicePoint. SEC & federal investigations, insider selling when the *&^% was hitting the fan, customer complaints, litigation, etc. Did it really have to be this way? And how come the company’s board hasn’t fired Smith or held itself accountable for the mess? For a company that doesn’t understand trust -- not customer information -- is its core asset, something desperately needs to give in this situation.
Bernie Ebbers and Scott Sullivan, former WorldCom villains. Here’s hoping these two clowns both get life sentences for dragging everyone back through their hopeless saga. It probably won’t happen, but if there was a lagging indicator in the market that no one wants to claim, then it’s the daily Executives on Trial drama.
Harry Stonecipher, President and CEO, Boeing. Make that former President and CEO. Lured out of retirement to help restore Boeing’s standing, Stonecipher has been fired for having an extramarital affair with a female employee. Ironically, he had been brought in to restore the company’s standing following previous scandals. Can we say ridiculously bad judgment? Congratulations to the company’s board for taking prompt action.
Tuesday, February 08, 2005
Single Points of Failure
While the how to be more successful, self-help movement rages on, is anyone interested in the other side of the story?
Failure is a topic that no one likes to acknowledge directly. And for good reason. It’s painful, depressing and debilitating at times.
Rather than harp on the obvious, however, here is another way of viewing the issue.
Single points of failure, in the personal leadership brand context, refer to areas or attributes that everyone possesses, which can generate devastating outcomes if not managed properly. Examples: Bad tempers, poor treatment of people, cheating or, at a simplistic level, not doing what you say you will do.
Even success can become a single point of failure. Say you’re a top producer with a large client as a sole revenue source. That client, if not managed properly, can represent a single point of failure through your own doing or events out of your control.
If you are unable to relate in personal terms, consider admired companies such as General Electric, Microsoft and Wal-Mart. Single points of failure from a product or operations standpoint would probably be readily apparent. But what would be more difficult to find are single points of failure from a leadership and/or senior-level human capital perspective.
Great leaders and great companies know that if they don’t develop depth and knowledge capital across a range of competencies and industries their business will eventually cease to exist.
Enron, WorldCom, Adelphia or any of the other bankruptcy poster children prove the veracity of single points of failure. In each case, individual leaders failed miserably, and due to poor judgment, zero credibility and lost reputation, the respective businesses suffered. (Note: WorldCom luckily had turned to MCI in time to retain market value, but it’s taking awhile to figure out what that value represents. Adelphia is preparing for auction, but the company’s intrinsic value, if they ever had any, has been lost forever.)
Single points of failure also speak directly to why succession and team building are critically important. Boards of directors would be well served to study failure more closely instead of stamping their own definitions of success, or worse yet, turning to fads such as corporate social responsibility to cure their ills.
At an individual level, the challenge is to determine your own single points of failure and then identify strategies for managing the points over time.
In the meantime, keep reaching for the success stars. That remains the only surefire way to outrun failure.
Failure is a topic that no one likes to acknowledge directly. And for good reason. It’s painful, depressing and debilitating at times.
Rather than harp on the obvious, however, here is another way of viewing the issue.
Single points of failure, in the personal leadership brand context, refer to areas or attributes that everyone possesses, which can generate devastating outcomes if not managed properly. Examples: Bad tempers, poor treatment of people, cheating or, at a simplistic level, not doing what you say you will do.
Even success can become a single point of failure. Say you’re a top producer with a large client as a sole revenue source. That client, if not managed properly, can represent a single point of failure through your own doing or events out of your control.
If you are unable to relate in personal terms, consider admired companies such as General Electric, Microsoft and Wal-Mart. Single points of failure from a product or operations standpoint would probably be readily apparent. But what would be more difficult to find are single points of failure from a leadership and/or senior-level human capital perspective.
Great leaders and great companies know that if they don’t develop depth and knowledge capital across a range of competencies and industries their business will eventually cease to exist.
Enron, WorldCom, Adelphia or any of the other bankruptcy poster children prove the veracity of single points of failure. In each case, individual leaders failed miserably, and due to poor judgment, zero credibility and lost reputation, the respective businesses suffered. (Note: WorldCom luckily had turned to MCI in time to retain market value, but it’s taking awhile to figure out what that value represents. Adelphia is preparing for auction, but the company’s intrinsic value, if they ever had any, has been lost forever.)
Single points of failure also speak directly to why succession and team building are critically important. Boards of directors would be well served to study failure more closely instead of stamping their own definitions of success, or worse yet, turning to fads such as corporate social responsibility to cure their ills.
At an individual level, the challenge is to determine your own single points of failure and then identify strategies for managing the points over time.
In the meantime, keep reaching for the success stars. That remains the only surefire way to outrun failure.
Tuesday, January 04, 2005
Listening to Create Loyalty
Simple conclusion, right? Not so fast.
Everything that we do, every device that we rely on to do our work (computer, phone, email, Blackberry, etc.), in short, nearly everything in our daily path moves us farther away from listening. Speaking in extreme terms, our entire lives now seem set up not to listen to each other.
Why have we allowed this trend to take hold? The reasons are numerous. Listening requires more attention than any of us have on a given day. It's hard work, which means we don't want any part of it.
Then there's the fear and anxiety side that usually results from dealing with difficult personalities. To paraphase Emerson, individual ego and personality often speak so loudly that it's difficult to hear someone says.
To truly listen often means hearing what's not being said as well as what's being said. That skill is rare, but if you find someone who can effectively read between the lines, you'll find a loyal following somewhere close by.
So, what can we do to listen better?
Step one is awareness. If you're not connecting with someone or unable to leave a lasting impression, you're not observing the basic rule of listening: Consciously thinking about what the other person is trying to convey prior to articulating your own response.
It also helps to learn first what your audience doesn't want to hear and then work your way back to what they do want to hear. No one actively seeks confirmation for what they don't want to know. However, when framed in a different context, it's often possible to reach common ground without having to sacrifice your original intent.
Good luck 'listening to create loyalty' in 2005.
It could be the resolution that no one else has, ahem, listened to already.
JG
P.S. If you're still reading, please feel free to post some anonymous counter-commentary or your own thoughts on this topic.
Everything that we do, every device that we rely on to do our work (computer, phone, email, Blackberry, etc.), in short, nearly everything in our daily path moves us farther away from listening. Speaking in extreme terms, our entire lives now seem set up not to listen to each other.
Why have we allowed this trend to take hold? The reasons are numerous. Listening requires more attention than any of us have on a given day. It's hard work, which means we don't want any part of it.
Then there's the fear and anxiety side that usually results from dealing with difficult personalities. To paraphase Emerson, individual ego and personality often speak so loudly that it's difficult to hear someone says.
To truly listen often means hearing what's not being said as well as what's being said. That skill is rare, but if you find someone who can effectively read between the lines, you'll find a loyal following somewhere close by.
So, what can we do to listen better?
Step one is awareness. If you're not connecting with someone or unable to leave a lasting impression, you're not observing the basic rule of listening: Consciously thinking about what the other person is trying to convey prior to articulating your own response.
It also helps to learn first what your audience doesn't want to hear and then work your way back to what they do want to hear. No one actively seeks confirmation for what they don't want to know. However, when framed in a different context, it's often possible to reach common ground without having to sacrifice your original intent.
Good luck 'listening to create loyalty' in 2005.
It could be the resolution that no one else has, ahem, listened to already.
JG
P.S. If you're still reading, please feel free to post some anonymous counter-commentary or your own thoughts on this topic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)