Dupont CEO: Quote of the year, 2013, comes early

It's not even 2013 yet, but here's the quote of the year -- before the year even technically begins. From today's Wall Street Journal story, "New Regulations for the New Year." (CFO Journal, B8 print edition, Dec. 11, 2012)

"We need to have certainty so that we can plan," said Ellen Kullman, CEO, Dupont Co. Kullman made these remarks at a recent meeting of the National Association of Corporate Directors whose members are responsible for helping lead and plan for their respective companies' futures.

Now if you read this quote and say, "spot on; she's absolutely correct" then you probably don't want to go further than this line for fear of your hair catching on fire.

When was there absolute certainty, or more specifically, when was the last time certainty existed in the markets, business, life, etc.? Was it when everything was going great gangbusters back in the go go days of the 1990s? Was it perhaps earlier than that -- back in the Roaring Twenties before World War II?

While it's obvious Kullman was referring to the pending fiscal cliff issue and all of its potential realities, what's less obvious, or more subtle, is how much fear and uncertainty now inform leadership decisions, many of which could benefit from more vision, confidence and contrarian wisdom to sail against the headwinds of conventional thought.

Message to CEOs or other wannabes: If you're still griping about being over-regulated, over-taxed and otherwise victimized by the government at this time next year, then it will have long been time to remove the word "leadership" from your vocabulary.

# # #

Chick-fil-A#: Challenged in the public square

http://www.11alive.com/news/article/259214/40/Chick-fil-A-president-We-support-Biblical-families

Two and a half months after the original firestorm, Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy weighed back in on previous commentary during yet another unintended yet probably well meaning sitting. The scene is captured in the attached clip from Atlanta's NBC affiliate, WXIA-TV. Cathy seems to have been heavily coached since the last appearance, which is understandable considering how much controversy was created based on the "guilty as charged" commentary on the biblical definition of family. If there ever was a situation that begged for a fuller, more controlled format such as a speech or Q&A vs. sound bites, then this is the one. The only thing that happens when you repeat the same message about a negative event is the negative event gets reinforced in people's minds vs. forging new ground. The Obama campaign's forays with Big Bird this week fall in same category. That example reinforces a bad performance in the first presidential debate with challenger Mitt Romney. Interesting brand name times continue in the current season.

# # #

Novartis Chairman Vasella: 'You can teach concepts, but you can't teach experiences.'

This is a really good interview with the head of Novartis, Daniel Vasella. It's difficult to recall more truth on leadership in a single place than this feature from "The McKinsey Quarterly:" http://www.mckinsey.com/features/leading_in_the_21st_century/daniel_vasella.

For the TGR record, it's equally difficult to find effective CEOs who can teach, or more importantly, transfer concepts as well. Rare in today's fear-based environment.

 

# # #

Passion 2.0

Like so many job and career truths, the "work with passion" rule is being rewritten as we speak. No one captures the changing truths better than Cal Newport, a Georgetown University professor, published author and millennial expert if there ever was one.  Here's his latest piece: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/30/jobs/follow-a-career-passion-let-it-follow-you.html?src=me&ref=general

Conventional wisdom says follow your passion and everything, including your career and work dreams, will come true. Newport throws this point on its head. That's a good thing. While it's difficult to name someone who accomplished great things in the world's eyes without passion, there are plenty of worker bees who are quite good and well compensated for what they do who may not be filled with passion every day. They let their passion channel the more pertinent challenge: Identify where the greatest need lies matched up against gifts, talents and where the greatest energy can be derived. From there passion becomes a byproduct or ingredient in the larger goal vs. a means to an end or even the end itself. Newport puts it more succinctly when he says let your passion follow you as opposed to you following your passion. Great food for thought.

# # #

Yahoo#: "We need to see winning CEOs, not more failures"

Note: This post originally appeared in 2012 when Yahoo was in the hunt for a COO, or number two to then CEO, Marissa Mayer. Yahoo was sold to Verizon earlier this week.

Yahoo is searching far and wide for a new chief operating officer (COO), according to All Things Digital's Kara Swisher, http://allthingsd.com/20120816/exclusive-yahoo-conducting-a-search-for-a-coo-as-no-2-to-mayer/?mod=tweet.

Where they'll look, who they'll find and hire remain open questions. Where can't exclude Google, former takeover partner, Microsoft, or even Facebook at this point. The executive search firm, Spencer Stuart and Jim Citrin, are leading the effort, which means whoever emerges will likely be a known commodity doing the job close by.

Since Yahoo has been a poster child of CEO failure over the past five years, "The Garlington Report (TGR)" decided to ask a few additional questions along the lines of why does Yahoo need a COO and what can this person contribute that's not already in the mix.

Responses among executive recruiters yielded some strong views that seemed worth sharing. Passion is never fleeting among true king and queen maker wannabes. Here is a sampling of comments not for attribution (primarily so people can speak freely without fear of being misquoted, mischaracterized or, a personal favorite, misunderstood.)

"...Marissa needs all the firepower she can get to turn the ship around. If she needs to call him/her a COO, a president, a head of industrialization.Whatever she just needs really great leaders around the table. I don't care whether she has five COOs. I just care that she makes it...I'm also sick of everyone, including myself, who want to attack the brave vs. wanting them to succeed. We need to see winning CEOs, not more failures."

It's worth noting that in today's rapid fire environment the time to develop into a great CEO simply isn't provided anymore. Everyone wants results overnight; few are willing to be patient like they should. Meddling boards bowing to activist pressure usually are to blame for this dynamic.

Other industry players aren't sold on Mayer's chops as CEO and see the COO hire as a way to bring much needed competency that doesn't exist at the top. Here's a particularly strong indictment (which now brings things full circle.)

"They (Yahoo) need a COO because their CEO has no content to do the job. Never reported to a board, never reported to a CEO, never led anything (other than products), never done a turnaround, is not financially literate, never led large teams, never owned a P&L (profit and loss statement), only worked in a monopoly with the wind at her back, never dealt with an activist shareholder -- should I keep going?"

# # #

Best Buy#: CEO Joly branded before even beginning

A friend who consults with Best Buy passed along the following tidbit yesterday: "Everyone is jazzed up. New CEO (Hubert Joly) was at headquarters today (Minneapolis). Isn't high visibility what leadership is about during times of distress?"

My sarcastic "does he have his work visa yet?" reply aside, the obvious across the board response is, "Yes!" The Best Buy case, however, is puzzlingly perilous. The company is essentially their own takeover target with behind the scenes efforts being led by founder Richard Schultz and private equity players. Shares are plunging based on sentiment that unless something changes the electronics retailer's business model is done. Enter Joly, a the former head of Carlson Hospitality, the privately held travel and hospitality company that runs restaurants yet has nothing truly retail in the portfolio. Joly is immediately branded by media and analysts as a "surprise choice with no retail experience," even though he has a proven track record turning around companies and increasing revenues.

Then in today's news cycle we learn that Joly negotiated some handsome change in contract terms, which are standard at this level. So basically from a personal leadership and executive compensation point of view, heads Joly wins, tails he doesn't lose.

But here's the rub. Great managers and leaders at this level don't do things solely for money. They take on opportunities where they think they can work hard and succeed. The ones who don't have this motivation are usually the "chasing stars" flame-outs making headlines later.

Back to the company for a minute. There is so much in flux right now that the new CEO won't be afforded the time to do long-term planning and execution to impact change. That's an unfortunately reality that a lot of companies and firms face right now. Fear and uncertainty rule the day until something changes that can be believed in.

 

# # #

First, you have to be a guru

Ram Charan is largely viewed as one of the most influential advisors and prolific writers ever to consult for a living. His latest views withstanding, http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2012/08/08/why-boards-fail-to-choose-the-right-ceo/, Charan's cult status points to relatively new realities in senior-level leadership circles that seem worth pointing out:

1.) While it still counts for a great deal, advisors no longer have to be "in the room" to have influence. Charan, for example, was not present when IBM chose Louis Gerstner to be CEO. And to no one's direct knowledge, Charan failed to play a direct role in this groundbreaking selection, which led to one of the most notable corporate turnarounds ever. Yet he opines as if he were.

2.) Guru status means you're granted grand leeway with characterizing situations. In the Fortune piece, Charan says "no one at Citi is questioning Pandit now." That may be true from Charan's point of view, but it was just a few months ago when the board rejected a new executive compensation plan outright that would have raised Pandit's pay substantially. That type of move usually doesn't happen if everyone is in the same boat. Citi remains a reputational lightning rod, but their bigger brethren, JP Morgan and Barclays, continue to steal critical light. The missing fact here is boards question their CEOs daily, especially ones in big brand name companies where performance lags. The not so missing fact is they rarely do anything about the situation until the bottom falls out. To that end, both Citi and Barclays have new Chairmen, leaving Jamie Dimon at JP Morgan all alone at the top as both CEO and chairman. It would appear that in the big bank class yesterday's governance mandate, separating the two roles, continues to be left solely to those holding the power.

# # #

Chick-fil-A: Unintentional endorsement?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/02/opinion/let-chick-fil-a-fly-free.html

Attached is what looks to be an unintentional endorsement for free speech from a Georgia Tech dean who happens to be gay. This is the type of discourse that a company under attack welcomes freely. Not all the echo chamber appreciation and kiss in days that media salivate over.

A couple months ago, a disillusioned manager at Goldman Sachs named Greg Smith issued a similar op-ed complaining about the firm's culture. It was like a shot heard across the world. It should be interesting to see if the dean's comments about Chick-fil-A travel as far and wide.

# # #

Chick-fil-A: Stop the statements

So Chick-fil-A has issued yet another statement on their committment to biblical principles. Here's a link: http://www.chick-fil-a.com/Pressroom/Press-Releases#?release=LGBT-statement in case you haven't already seen the statement. It essentially says nothing new other than re-affirming what's already been stated, which begs the question why make a statement? They've also re-inserted Truett Cathy, Sr., by name into the mix, which is not advisable. Here's what the statement could convey if the tactic was still worth something:

"The Chick-fil-A family is committed to serving customers of any gender, race or ethnicity who want to enjoy the great fast dining experience that's been the company's longstanding hallmark. The latest outcry has been heard from those who disagree with our beliefs on marriage. It's our sincere hope that our personal views will not be held in judgment as a reason for not visiting our restaurants nationwide. Thank you for your continuing patronage. As a sponsor of the London Olympics, we're pleased to support a global showcase of athleticism that has no peer."

Love thy neighbor, eat more chicken!

Coke: Corporate-speak

So the Coca-Cola Company announced some management changes today and the creation of two new super jobs, which essentially replicate old consolidated jobs into two new bottles. It's amazing sometimes to consider what the company known as Coke garners from an attention point of view. Here's an excerpt from the company's release that highlights what the current CEO thinks the moves signify:

"With a solid foundation and momentum in our business, now is the time to take the next step in our evolution," Kent said Monday in an email message to Coca-Cola employees. "By consolidating leadership of our global operations under two large, but similar sized geographic regions and BIG, we will streamline reporting lines, intensify our focus on key markets and create a structure that leverages synergies and gives us flexibility to strategically adjust our business within those geographies in the future."

Now I ask the rest of you mere mortals: Can you 'consolidate,' 'streamline,' 'focus,' 'create,' 'leverage' and 'provide flexibility to adjust' all in one fell swoop? Good on ya if you can. Time to get re-trained in corporate-speak if you can't.

# # #

Chick-fil-A: Love thy neighbor, eat more chicken

Have you ever stepped in doo-doo and wished you hadn't? That sentiment defines the public imbroglio over Chick-fil-A and President Dan Cathy's recent clarification of the company's views on marriage. The clarification, which was followed by a cold company statement that was basically perceived as "hey, wait a second, some of our best customers are gay," has created a firestorm during an otherwise quiet period preceding the Olympics.

At the core, Cathy's walk into quick sand was self inflected and has become a public issue that now threatens the beloved company's chicken sandwich. Some observers call it a gay rights, political or social issue while others believe it's an attack on traditional Christian values. That may all be true, but it misses the point that not even a politically motivated Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day on Aug. 1st can re-discover.

Publicly held corporations have an obligation to stakeholders to report on their business, which may or may not include social issues. A subset even feel compelled to comment on public policies impacting their business. Private companies, on the other hand, are generally closely held and only accountable to themselves. Chick-fil-A falls in the latter category.

Younger audiences who now control the on-line sphere, which by the way has been flaming this issue for months, do not tend to make public vs private distinctions. Mainly because few know what they mean. If you happen to be a known entity or brand name in Chick-fil-A's case, then what you say will be reviewed, scrutinized or flamed if something is perceived as "uncool." Throw in a potentially contentious social issue, such as gay marriage during an election year, and well you've now started a fire that not even the best fire starter knows how to put out. On Wednesday alone, 7,000 Facebook fans commented on the Chick-fil-A fan page following the news cycle featuring the Muppets dropping their affiliation. It's probably a good thing Facebook hasn't developed a dislike button yet. Here's a really shrill example that might produce a few squirms:

http://gizmodo.com/5928926/chick+fil+a-got-caught-pretending-to-be-a-fake-teenage-girl-on-facebook

Couple this reality with the company's stodgy homespun culture based in the Southeast pitted against the highly vocal gay and lesbian community and you've got a culture war chasm, which is going to be filled like a vacuum. Notice how the Christian values factor has not been underlined even though it carries weight as the original spark. Taking that thought a step further from a true believer point of view...

What if the topic for discussion on the Baptist blog where Cathy made his comments had been different? What if, for example, Cathy was asked to share his views on Jesus Christ being the only direct way to God? Do you think that would have offended enough of a mass to warrant public outrage? It's always about context and how what you're saying fits into a larger story vs. how you view it yourself. We all hold beliefs, but when it comes to public disclosure, how those beliefs are framed nearly always depends on factors out of your control. The media love a conflict, too but that's beside the point.

Okay, not all media. A friend who also happens to be a published author and journalist framed the situation this way: "I like to think of Christianity as one of the world's most tolerant religions. I think executives who include tolerance as part of their values can bring at least a bit of personal religious faith into their approach to work with generally good results. That would be true, in fact, for any religious beliefs, Christian or otherwise. When intolerance is braided into the mix, that's a recipe for trouble."

A Christian business leader may have put it best: "It seems as though we have forgotten the Great Commandment to leap frog to the Great Commission." Well said and applicable to this latest outburst.

Finally, for the best encapsulation yet from a secular business leadership POV, go to http://mobile.businessweek.com/articles/2012-07-26/god-and-gay-marriage-what-chick-fil-a-could-learn-from-marriott

# # #

Must see and read new blogger

Preston William Huey, Jr., better known as Bill, has officially entered the blogosphere. Why is this significant you may ask? Well, for starters, he's a great friend and inspiring source of ideas and wisdom. His continuing presence both on-line and off-line has proven enriching to the TGR blog as well as supporting businesses. Bill is one of the sharpest minds you'll find on current events, issues and other important matters that impact business leaders' lives whether they want to accept it or not. He's also a widely published writer with comedic flair and is known in newsrooms everywhere as an informed source with a sharp point of view. Too sharp for both his audience and own good sometimes but that's beside the point. You can find the 'Hue's new place mark at wwww.inothernews4.blogspot.com. Welcome to the slog called blog, Bill. Great to see you have finally taken the plunge with a plunger that other discerning minds will now be able to appreciate.

Tuesday Twofer

So two executives at separate companies made the funny pages today -- both for unrelated reasons that led to their departures.

First on the chopping block is Michael Francis who joined J.C. Penney as president back in October. Holding a similar previous role at Target, Francis was responsible for trying to explain the dated department chain's pricing strategy. Penney's recently reported a larger than expected sales loss, forcing the current CEO who has been lauded for his previous retail work at Apple to take the reins back over on store merchandising. Any time an executive is forced out after less than a year the question begs: How could one person be held to a standard others are not? Clearly there had to be a fall guy so Francis is out. Safe to say he won't be turning up in any unemployment lines soon.

The second example is a senior executive, Keith Block, who headed sales for Oracle in North America. Block's fate was sealed when some instant messages were disclosed as part of a lawsuit filed by HP. According to filing excerpts published by the Wall Street Journal, Block said that Oracle had "bought a dog" when it purchased Sun Microsystems and that former HP CEO Mark Hurd who Oracle hired following his HP firing had "produced a lot of noise but not many results." Oracle had no official statement but released its earnings report three days early. Ironically enough profits increased 7.5 percent during the fourth quarter. Key takeaway from this hubris sample: You might want to temper language when on official company communication channels. Especially when you work for a king named Larry Ellison who can pull off public commentary that other mere mortals can't.

# # #

Executive Search: Land of the lost fight over shrinking pie

A recent spin through familiar territory has yielded enough material to warrant posting. Disclaimer: TGR once considered morphing into an executive search industry newsletter, but thanks to other intervening events, plans were shelved.

To understand both real and perceived value of executive search, you have to trace brand name CEO turnover situations, such as what recently took place at Yahoo. Their "search firm of record," if such a title still holds sway, was Heidrick & Struggles who assisted the board in the former selection of Carol Bartz who was fired and then replaced by Scott Thompson who also was recently fired (ok, officially resigned.) What role executive search played is left largely to perception, which tends to be shaped by media, such as the Wall Street Journal, and in the case of Yahoo, its digital cousin, All Things Digital. The perception game is where legends have historically been made. The makers comprise a short list: Tom Neff at Spencer Stuart and Gerry Roche at Heidrick & Struggles. There have been other big figures but these two tended to garner the most attention.

The game, however, has changed. Neff and Roche are now public vestiges to a bygone era. The challenge is how to re-define as these dynamics move away from old boy networks and smoke filled rooms on the Upper East Side to a more transparent, democratic approach that de-emphasizes going outside to find leaders. The exceptions tend to be the big companies who screw up governance or succession so badly that they have to use brand name firms to protect their own reputations. Insert Spencer Stuart, which was recently selected by Best Buy to right their sinking ship. The truth that no one at the "top" wants to acknowledge is that risk has been at all-time low during the most recent economic correction, and it remains a large obstacle to the change we can believe in.

Except for those who have already taken the risk and now thumb their noses at big search firms. Insert your own names here: Stephen Miles who used to be with Heidrick & Struggles in their leadership consulting business and now operates independently, Peter Crist who used to be with Korn Ferry prior to starting his own Chicago-based firm, Kelvin Thompson who now runs the global boutique Montarosa after a series of high-level roles with Boyden Search and Heidrick, respectively; and a personal favorite, Russell Reynolds, who still operates independently while his own namesake firm, Russell Reynolds & Associates, wagers on somehow someway. Matthew Wright, please phone home!

Where does all this lead? Who knows; fewer care. The new rules of the game are still sorting themselves out. One trend is clear. If you're an established entity who has to defend values at every turn, you're constantly under attack while being held to a standard that isn't shared by everyone else. Case in point: Recent public flapping by CT Partners, formerly Christian & Timbers, which has recently taken public shots at Heidrick & Struggles who used to employ CT Partners CEO, Brian Sullivan following the purchase of Sullivan's former financial services boutique.

If this summary is starting to sound like a bunch of cats fighting in a broken down barn, then you get the picture necessary to make your own conclusion. Due respect to the industry's only association, AESC, no metrics are required to evaluate this so called business, which has historically been plagued by bought out analysts and other charlatans with zero credibility. This lack of accountability may ultimately be the industry's undoing. In the meantime, anyone need a new CEO for the long awaited upturn?

# # #

Do you just want to be Facebook friends?

Note: Following is a monthly client letter distributed via email earlier today.

Dear Clients and Colleagues:
As the world now seems to revolve around the newly public enterprise called Facebook instead of the sun, it's virtually impossible not to pose a question that deserves a better answer (see subject line.) First some trademark perspective.

The social media universe has now come full circle. Whether it be Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr or LinkedIn, everyone is on their chosen channel(s,) but few if anyone married over the age of the 30 can encapsulate its value. The attitude has generally been since everyone else is doing it so there must be something worth exploring. Short of a few uprisings in the Middle East and other breaking news moments such as the recent same day retirement of Chicago Cubs pitcher Kerry Wood, the channels' ability to make a difference remains open to wide interpretation.

Take this down to a sliver called the executive marketplace and the playing field gets pretty clear pretty fast. High ranking executives have lost their jobs as a result of bad Twitter feeds (see http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/05/cfo-fired-for-boring-twitter-blog-and-facebook.html) while others such as Whole Foods CEO John Mackey Foods have gotten into trouble making inappropriate comments when weighed against their special interests. Couple that with major advertisers such as General Motors pulling Facebook ad dollars, and there's a "show me the value" mentality now emerging among decision-makers despite what personal usage metrics may indicate.

The real point here, however, lies in the cracks. Call it the bad social irony of social media. While the tools can obviously broaden networks and enrich thought horizons, the spread also has had the opposite effect. It's now quite acceptable to ignore people who actually call you, or worse yet, ignore the call while vice versa turning to a kinder, more passive LinkedIn profile for caller background. And I'm not talking about strangers -- quite to the contrary, people who actually know each other or have expressed a desire to help, do business with and/or be in real relationship as opposed to on-line pen pals.

Here's the requested call to action: If you want to simply be Facebook friends then state your case. There's nothing wrong with that intention; in fact, in most cases, it may be the right path. However, if you're a leader and you really want to build, develop and maintain relationships because that's one of your primary responsibilities, then don't fall into this trap. It's a dead zone of artificiality, avarice and laziness that quite frankly is no longer acceptable. Socially, business or otherwise. Last time anyone checked, clicks weren't the same as calls. Or at least not yet.

Happy social media-ing,

JG

Jeremy Garlington
Point of View, LLC
Five Concourse Pkwy./Suite 2850
Atlanta, GA 30328
Web log: "The Garlington Report (TGR)": www.povblogger.blogspot.com -- "Why do CEOs lie on resumes? Hint: Because they can."
Phone: 404-606-0637
Email: garlingtons@msn (primary); jgarlington@pointofviewllc.com (consultancy)

Yahoo takeway: Time to restate resumes

By now the business world has learned the inevitable: Yahoo CEO Scott Thompson has resigned due to pressures stemming from fabricating or "over-inflating" a computer science degree on his resume. The crime, however, is never as bad as the cover-up. Thompson's defense that he essentially didn't know about the infraction until a 2004 vetting process when he joined PayPal and that he hasn't noticed anything since then obviously didn't pass anyone's smell test, including the Yahoo board.

What's the key takeaway? Leaders of public companies obviously have to be vigilant both about their businesses and personal credibility. The latter may factor more heavily now more than ever. Yet it continues to be a known fact that some of the best fiction lies on executive resumes. Message to those who are still fudging their CVs: Go ahead and restate your accomplishments just as you might restate quarterly earnings. Now is the time to get things right before someone else does.

# # #

An unconventional and inspiring winner

As adults we're often told that dreams are for children, or the young at heart. Nothing could be further from the truth despite real world pressures that tend to squeeze aspirations out of our hearts and minds.

Watching the final round at the Masters yesterday, which coincided with Easter Sunday, it was almost impossible not to feel some level of emotional connection with the improbable winner, Bubba Watson. Watson used the second hole of a sudden death playoff to share his special moment, sticking a wedge shot from the woods pin high onto the green. While he would sink the second putt to win the tournament, the victory was essentially secured in the miraculous approach shot made from deep within the woods.

Then during the ceremonial awarding of the green jacket, the unconventional golfer said something that reverberated into what could be the quote of the year. But you had to be listening carefully underneath the outpouring of emotion to hear Watson's words. CBS announcer Jim Nantz asked Watson about his improbable run that led to victory and his answer was, "I don't really know yet. My dreams have never gotten this far before."

May we all take a page or cue from this moment. Instruction for the ages. Keep the dream alive!

# # #

Are you ready for the 1st Annual ELF?

We thought more regular readers might enjoy a post developed in the spirit of the season called Hilaria. It's the 1st Annual Executive Leadership Flashdance, or ELF for short. Here you go:

1.) MF Global Founder and former New Jersey Governor John Corzine was last seen boarding a Virgin Airlines flight into outer space. His pilot was none other than Richard Branson who finally has found an innovative way to travel beyond the upper atmosphere. Cost of Corzine's ticket was not immediately available but it's estimated to be in the $4 billion range.

2.) Bank of America Corp. or BofA last week week announced plans to form a global advisory group to explore ways to grow internationally. In a not so surprising move but not widely reported, they also have decided to change their name to the Bank of the Whole Damn World (BofWDW.) This new enterprise will take on the structure and systems of a SuperPAC and will raise money strictly in U.S. dollars.

3.) In a follow-up to their Final Four duel, Kentucky Head Coach John Calamari, sorry Blue Misters, Calipari, and Louisville Head Coach Rick Pitino will exchange jobs to demonstrate renewed collegiality in the face of deep hostility between programs.

4.) The New Orleans Saints, under the blessing of Commish Roger Goodell, a NFL life-timer, will soon name Alabama Head Coach Nick Saban to be their head coach and chief leadership evangelist. His first move will be to trade for John Parker Wilson who will back-up Drew Brees whose $500 million contract over 10 years will set new records for player salary.

5.) Straight on the heels of their historic meeting in Cuba this week, Fidel Castro and Pope Benedict have announced a joint alliance that will place Castro in a historically unconventional succession line to run the Vatican. His first order of business will be to bring back fascism while he continues to work with Benedict to rid the world of fanaticism.

6.) The relatively new CEOs of Apple and Blackberry respectively, both of whom have names that aren't memorable, Armstrong and Theins (kind of sounds like a bad steak house don't you think?) have agreed to a merger of unequals. Apple will pledge part of its $100 billion war chest to rescue Blackberry and create a new co-branded product called the AppleBerry.

7.) In a departure from normal practices, Goldman Sachs has announced an early life stage intern program to protect against the exodus of young MBA talent reacting strongly to the latest confessions by rogue vice president, Greg Smith. Their first trainee is Malia Obama, 15, fresh off her extended Spring Break in Mexico with 22 Secret Service agents and small cadre of friends and advisors. Full disclosure: Goldman Sachs was the largest institutional supporter of Malia's father's campaign in 2008.

8.) Tabling a decision on the legality of an individual health insurance mandate, The Supreme Court has announced that contrary to its regular summer schedule they will be adjourning immediately to re-open the previous case of Bush vs. Gore. Evidently a recount has been called for by the powerful legal interests of Bain Capital, which has decided to shift its support from presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney to backing the renewed campaign of newly hopeful Presidential candidate, Al Gore. Bain's stated desire is to have a more sustainable Earth vs. fully insured population.

9.) Carly Fiorina and Tim Hurd have been re-named as co-CEOs of HP, allowing now former CEO Meg Whitman to begin her confidential campaign to replace Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State following the re-election of President Obama, Malia's father. This move is clearly seen as a repudiation of the current strategy to consolidate HP's printing division, which was originally proposed by Fiorina and later rejected by Hurd.

10.) Backed by George Soros, Warren Buffett, Bill and Melinda Gates and Boone Pickens, Hillary and husband, Bill, have formed a global governance council that will eventually rule the ENTIRE WORLD with the United States reporting to their handpicked board of directors. Saving the planet from themselves will lead the agenda. Other initiatives will include making Puerto Rico the 51st state, taking over Cuba when Castro moves to the Vatican and saving the company, Yahoo, from further encroachment by Microsoft.

Here's hoping some more serious readers can find levity as well as instructional insights in this post marking April 1st, the day set aside for fools and their errands. See http://www.april-fools.us/history-april-fools.htm for more background.

Thanks for reading,

JG

'Big Change is Coming' Hint: Hide!

So a friend emails two hours ago and asks, "have you seen this?" It was in reference to the New York Times op-ed by former Goldman Sachs vice president Greg Smith (btw: Goldman has 10,000 other employees holding the same title.) The little shot heard round the media world didn't quite register with my friend who by every admission is a technology guy.

Then yesterday a Tweet trends towards a great tongue-in-cheek summary http://allthingsd.com/20120315/ceo-thompson-tells-yahoos-real-change-is-coming-its-exclusive-internal-memo-time/ of an internal memo sent out by the new Yahoo CEO warning that "big change is coming." It's a relative safe statement to say that not only is that message scary, but that every Yahoo saw it and digested the content from multiple POVs. A few folks in Silicon Valley probably saw the memo, too (facetious.)

What's the point here? Anything resembling news with conflict travels at the speed of light and more of it is coming quickly to replace whatever happened this week. Both the Goldman and Yahoo examples point to many things, but here's the rub from a corporate leadership POV: Stay proactive, act fast and be transparent even when every corporate control or trait you've been taught instructs otherwise. Anything put into writing is fair game in the Internet age. Embrace this truth or forever run scared at your peril. Audiences are selective, critical and ready to pounce on anything that's perceived as fake bake, scary or out of line with pedestrian values. Based on what passes as popular leadership these days, can you blame them?

# # #

Oracle of Omaha: Value or Commodity?

After picking it up in direct and indirect parts through other sources, it's clear that Warren Buffett's three-hour gabfest on CNBC this morning accomplished at least one of two things. First it continued his longly held perceived love affair with hearing himself talk to Rebecca Quick, a former Wall Street Journal print reporter turned broadcasting maven. No one can argue with the Oracle of Omaha's legendary investing record; that speaks for itself and always will. But from a branding perspective, Buffett has grown to resemble an over-exposed talking head. From the public rescue of Goldman Sachs back during the Crash to last year's infusion to Bank of America -- interceded by becoming best known business pals with President Obama, the mystique that gave rise to Buffett's fame now has been eroded. His latest announcement that he's chosen a successor but will not name him or her is downright kooky considering current public profile. Then again when you're rich and don't answer to anyone these things don't matter much. At least he's intellectually honest, which is more than what can be said about leaders in other sectors.

# # #

On-line networking: Friend or foe?

Dear Clients and Colleagues:

By way of personal testimony, I'm going to address a growing issue in the on-line marketplace, or more specifically business networking.

A trusted friend recently introduced a former colleague facing an inflection point. This person wasn't looking for immediate change per se; he wanted an objective framework for asking questions -- in a safe environment. Rather than immediately gather background, I held off looking him up on-line until meeting in person. Granted this modus operandi may be a little different since my business relies more heavily on one-to-one communication and relationship building vs. the one-to-many approach.

We are rapidly moving, okay, have moved into a world where lots of loose connections, or those known as Facebook friends, now rule the roost. The marketplace is largely responsible for this trend so far be it for anyone to become indignant about what amounts to a mostly positive trend when taking into account the trend's overall value.

Back to the previous story. If I had chosen to go on Linked In or Facebook to profile this person, then chances are details would have been gathered in typical form. By the same token the exercise also would have fed natural biases that naturally inform meeting someone for the first time. Flip this example around and several examples leap to mind where a prospective client profiled us and decided what we did wasn't for them -- without having a personal conversation.

Forgive the rapid fire question, but for crying out loud, have we lost that much human capacity that we're going to fear meeting someone new in business so much that we're going to profile inside and out prior to ever laying eyes on that person? Cynics may say yes that's been going on in the on-line dating world so what's the big deal. I am not one of those cynics --at least not on this topic.

Please join in an exercise of creative constraint when it comes to on-line social networking. Meeting new people with a blank slate that removes bias has more potential to open new doors and lead to new places of value, something that is needed right now across all sectors. Key search terms only go so far.

Put the personal back into (social) networking, in other words, or at the very least show profiling restraint so more game changing possibilities can present themselves. The fear of something new can never supercede the need to find something new. Thank you,

JG

Fate or Coincidence?

The death of former Penn State Coach Joe Paterno, or JoePa to die hard fans, has created its share of second guessing surrounding what amounts now to a tainted legacy. Barely noted deep within the obituaries lies an interesting fact that draws parallels with another former coaching legend, Paul "Bear" Bryant, the famed Alabama coach. Both men died shortly after coaching their last game; Bryant's passing came one month after his last game while Paterno died three months after coaching finale. Interestingly enough both icons played the University of Illinois in their final official games. Bryant tends to get a pass but for the record did exhibit rogue behavior by betting on games. Widely known at the time, it wasn't reported at length publicly -- or at least it didn't catch Twitter fire. Different time, different era.

This coincidence points back to history's most famous death pairing when John Adams and Thomas Jefferson both died on July 4, 1826, the nation's 50th birthday. On parallel paths their entire lives, Adams gave rise to Jefferson by having him write the Declaration of Independence ("John Adams," David McCullough.) Adams could have done it himself but knew Jefferson was a more eloquent writer and known figure. Adams also is reportedly to have spoken Jefferson's name moments prior to his death. As an aside, both men were widowed and did not remarry.

These iconic examples point back to those that we all have known who have worked in jobs for so long that their personal identities have suffered when the job changed or went away. We all have known examples of retirees who once they hung up the coat were done with working or learning new things. Our message is simple: Don't be one of these people. Pursue a calling, work hard at your job -- whatever it may be -- and be present and available to family and friends. Oh, and keep the faith, too.

If you can think of any other interesting famous death pairings, please leave a comment below. Thanks for reading,

JG

# # #

Yahoo: Nothing ever changes when it comes to brand name executive search

Yahoo's recent CEO appointment, picked nicely from PayPal, and the subsequent decision to revamp the company's board underscores how little things change when it comes to how big companies recruit and select talent.

First, the CEO appointment. This decision was obviously needed following the blow-up of the former CEO, Carol Bartz, who basically told her board to f*&% off. So naturally the board goes and gets what's perceived as a softer spoken yet tough operator with a 'Boston accent' as the WSJ headline read last week. The new office holder pledges very little beyond the basics so not to create undue expectations, which are already through the roof anyway. In his defense, that's exactly how to handle the situation.

Then directly following the appointment it's learned that someone has hired a search firm to help revamp the board since it's reportedly learned that Chairman Cliff Bostock would like to move on. Of course no one talks on the record so this is learned through "people close to the matter" or however it's termed now. This dovetails nicely with the CEO appointment.

Everything looks and appears to be picture perfect, right? Much like HP, a big brand name company has taken what it believes to be the appropriate action to impact change. There's only one slight problem. These moves are precisely the same ones that have always been made in these situations with possibly the exception of remaking a board after a CEO hire (although admittedly that's pretty common too.) Yahoo remains standing without a clear strategic direction and soon there will be a new cast of pending characters to sort out vision and strategy. Whether it's former CEO, Carol Bartz, or one of the four other CEOs over the past five years, putting in similar leaders in the same way will always yield the same thing, which may ultimately resemble the definition of insanity. The succession experts can be heard groaning from a mile away.

Then again if everyone is convinced and compensated to do the same thing over and over then why should anything change?

As a side note of disclosure, I used to work for the search firm named to handle the board revamping. No internal sources even know who is doing the work or aren't willing to confirm the obvious, which further compounds the mystery. When everyone wants to be on the inside and very few are, it's nearly impossible to know precisely what's going on. Hence the palace intrique in major brand name situations, another unchanging paradigm.

Anyone up for doing the same thing over and over in 2012 and getting handsomely rewarded?

# # #

Republican candidates usher in post-branding era

Don't look now but the BCS championship-like race for the Republican presidential nomination is ushering in the post-branding era. What does that mean? The traditional methods of branding, such as communicating a consistent message over time, have been replaced by pressure to get to the core faster than ever before anyone changes their minds. Audiences no longer matter as much as loyal followers, which takes more effort than sending out Tweets every hour. Performance and organization trump buzz for now or at least until buzz forms -- then all bets are off. Here are some other observations along similar lines:

1. Voters aren't as nuanced as the candidates think they are. But they still shop with a value-driven vengeance. It makes less difference whether you're a Tea Partier than it does someone who can hold sway without extremism overcoming sound principles. Rick Santorum's emergence in Iowa as the evangelical darling occurred AFTER caucus goers decided that Rick Perry and Michelle Bachman weren't as appealing. It wasn't sleeveless sweaters that garnered 25 percent of the vote; it was good 'ole fashioned hard work and retail appeal. Think Walmart before they got fancy with the new marketing regime.

2. None of the candidates have captured the essence of the Republican brand, which may be a good thing. Without an anointed presumptive winner in traditional party form no one in the field represents an A-player. The now perceived front runners are old names trying to reinvent themselves into something new. Think of the remaining field as brand extensions, or in the world of laundry detergent, lots of Cheer and generic names vs. the go to Tide. Mitt Romney and Ron Paul are hardly new exciting figures in the same image as Barack Obama in 2008. The media love a darling, but to date, no one can or will claim the mantle. This leads to an unfortunate formula: Little differentiation + known quantities = snooze fest.

Here's hoping Monday night's BCS championship game doesn't suffer the same fate!

# # #

Hardly coincidental

The re-ascendancy of Starbuck's CEO Howard Schultz to Fortune magazine's top executive ranking comes as no surprise. His company, or should we say the existing one he was hired into and then proceeded to re-invent, is a household name and just completed a record year of revenues and profits. It seems as though customers are still willing to pay five bucks for a latte even in these "most uncertain times."

What's revealing about the Schultz story, however, isn't so much about dollars and cents although record performance plays a leading role. It's more about Schultz's ability to straddle the growing fence between political crusader, community activist and business steward. These skills have increasingly grown in demand as large companies navigate an era defined by big government, regulation and environmental accountability. Schultz and Starbuck's have been at the forefront of this trend. Their continuing stamp of success reveals a few undeniable truths for leaders and businesses alike, mainly:

1.) Having a point of view about the issues impacting your business matters more than ever. When Congress and the president nearly ground government to a halt last summer over the debt ceiling, Schultz came out swinging, calling for a boycott on contributions to office holders and candidates alike who espoused obstructionist views. This was classic POVing at its highest form. Pro-active, controversial and lone wolf in tone and content. During a time when most companies are playing both sides of the aisle with contributions, Schultz made the calculation that it was in no one's interest to maintain the status quo. He of course didn't have to make this stand but did so because he evidently believed in the action. If more leaders and companies would follow suit maybe more of the "change we believe in" could occur? The recent more reactive response to immigration by Chipotle CEO Monty Moran partially qualifies although admittedly espousing a POV on an issue after an offense can be perceived as spin.

2.) Being willing to take a stand on unpopular but proper business practices, even when it represents great cost, can make a difference over time. This used to be called investing in a business. Despite high costs of doing so, Starbuck's still provides health care coverage to its part-time and full-time employees. Schultz has continually gone on record saying that will never change. The rewards come in the form of employee loyalty and lower turnover, which results in more consistent service, which leads to higher revenues and profits. Again more companies and leaders would be well served to track this line without solely focusing on short-term financials as a primary outcome. Easier said than done. But necessary.

Click here for the original Fortune magazine profile if you didn't already have the pleasure of reading over the holidays: http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2011/11/17/starbucks-howard-schultz-business-person-year/

Thanks for viewing. Happy New Year,

JG