Mr. Non-Fix it?

Editorial

Home Depot CEO Frank Blake will likely retain his role while the company continues to reach for a growth trajectory. Whether he should or not, however, remains open to debate.

The nation's largest home improvement retailer needs Blake’s trusted, reliable style and ability to “stick his fingers in the dikes,” according to an individual close to the situation.

What’s less certain is whether Blake is the guy to lead the company back to growth, something that investors have been clamoring for since the original founders left the building.

The answer is clearly “no” looking at things on paper. Blake is a Nardelli (as in former CEO Bob) disciple, has no contract and is a lawyer by training. So far his tenure has gotten above average marks -- even despite the previous facts, which rarely define big company leadership. At a simpler level, ask a long-time Home Depot shareholder about what their stock is worth today vs. 10 years ago. Watch out. You'll get an earful.

Let’s be clear. Unlike the analyst of the day on CNBC, we’re not calling for Blake’s scalp. That’s silly. Our main interest is determining when a board should ask the interim guy to turn the keys over to a more growth-oriented leader.

What won’t continue to wash indefinitely is the following line. Blake is a breath of fresh air following his predecessor. Duh! -- as any teenager would snap. Fresh air aside, sentiment needs to be future-oriented with a feeling of trust and confidence. It’s more about what a forward-looking strategy feels and looks like, and whether three years down the road, the current CEO will be driving strategy through effective execution.

One thing is for sure. Turnaround CEOs rarely make growth-oriented leaders. The landscape is littered with casualties. Recently ousted Citigroup CEO Charles Prince is one, but there are countless others.

So the question now becomes: When will the board act and who will they get? Stay tuned.

Conventional wisdom says nothing will be done until the markets bottom and growth can be more readily forecast. But that’s not how these situations generally play out. If the board decides it needs to make a change, recessions have little to no impact on their decision. Until then, they have to keep asking the relevant questions.

# # #

Coast to Coast

To blog or not to blog? is the question. Actually, that's not the question at all. The real question is: Who reads, or better yet, what do they do with what they read? For at least one day this year, we have an answer. See the attached, which presents a much better capsule of a presidential candidate-CEO pairing posted last week. Found Read is a Silicon Valley web log followed by IT and developer types occupying the normal Silicon Valley places. Thanks to them, we've added more capacity for readership without lifting a finger ourselves. Isn't that the whole point?

http://foundread.com/2008/01/11/mccain-welch-have-guts-clinton-is-a-gerstner-who-is-obama/

Can We Have This Dance?

It's the season of political dance. The Republicans look a bit lost with their normal waltz, while the Democrats are doing the three-step. The only absolute is the current narrative will change -- over and over and over again.

In the spirit of don't bite the fund raising hand that feeds you, we would like to issue a candidate-CEO pairing. Consider it two parts "Dancing with the Stars" and one part instructional for mere mortals.

Let's start with the Elephants, or Republicans. Mitt Romney (first picture below) talks endlessly about "his experience in the private sector" and "changing Washington." We would suggest pairing him with General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt, who despite popularity and innovation talk, has led during an era when the company's equity has remained virtually flat. Key takeaway: Beware of the platitudes.


New Hampshire winner and Comeback Adult John McCain is similar to Immelt's predecessor, Jack Welch, who ushered in much of business' preoccupation with leadership. Welch and McCain have published a litany of tomes, and their views seem to strengthen and resonate with time. The McCain-Welch pairing stands for experience, which has been unfairly overshadowed by change in the current cycle. If anyone thinks change is anything beyond good campaign rhetoric, then they need to take a couple aspirin and call their history doctor in the morning.

CEOs to pair with the Huckaboo and Mayor Giuliani don't leap to mind. These two are highly communicative, entertaining, funny and as energetic as the best used car salesmen. But that probably sells them too short.

Then there's actor/Senator turned candidate, Fred Thompson, who looks like he would rather be telling dirty jokes out back than running for high office. Chairman and now former CEO Jimmy Cayne at Bear Stearns may strike the greatest resemblance. This pairing desperately needs a week's supply of Red Bull and more hands-on execution.

Turning to the field of Donkeys, or Democrats...

We don't have a current CEO match for O'Bama (closest may have been Stanley O'Neal coming of age as Merrill Lynch's leader back when he first got the job.) Not having a CEO pairing is to O'Bama's advantage -- at least for right now while's new. Think media savvy, charismatic and thin on experience, which we saw our fair share of back during the rock star CEO era.

Clinton resembled former HP CEO Carly Fiorina right up until last night's come from behind win in New Hampshire. Pivoting off a comeback, candidate Clinton has newfound energy to run even the greatest turnaround. Perhaps Andrea Jung at Avon deserves this dance, or better yet, Lou Gerstner, the last notable guy who actually turned a large corporation around?

John Edwards strikes us the quintessential hedge fund trader turned Huck Finn who made all his profits during the last market turn and has simply been re-investing since then. In real life, he was heavily vested with Fortress so this depiction isn't entirely off the mark. The raised up by bootstraps turned multi-millionaire story is inspiring -- especially with John Mellencamp ballads playing in the background. But it all seems a bit hollow when measured against his belongings and thin political track record.

As to Bill Richardson, who arguably has the deepest resume of the entire field, we don't have an adequate CEO pairing for him, either. But he is the king of thoughtful personal views and one-liners (LOL: "I've been in hostage negotiations that were more civil.") That's a rare combination in CEO circles. Maybe John Chambers at Cisco before his second cup of coffee?

# # #

Delta's Drama Kings

Sometimes things aren't what they appear to be.

In an official announcement yesterday, Delta Airlines said that current President Ed Bastian will retain the CFO title, which effectively cancels previous plans to hire a new CFO. That was the official line along with some corporate speak about "seamlessly maintaining relationships and momentum..." Whatever.

Here's another take based on a leadership truth that often gets shoved aside.

According to sources familiar with the situation, Bastian and CEO Richard Anderson have developed a strong personal dislike of one another. No big surprise there, taking into account the original chain of events that led to Anderson's hiring. But since the personal dislike factor can't be applied specifically to a news context it gets dismissed as normal vagaries of the executive suite.

Anyone following this company would be wise to watch closely how this personal riff plays out with personnel and business decisions. We often learn a lot more from human behavior managing a company than events perceived as materially consequential to the business. Then there's the irony, which every rich story contains. CEO Anderson is reportedly more operations inclined while the "brain" and main strategist from the original team, Jim Whitehurst, left the building awhile back. Whitehurst is rumored to be the next CEO of RedHat in Raleigh, N.C., but we can't confirm that to be true. Look for Bastian to leave early next year if things don't improve.

As to rumors of a Northwest merger, well, it doesn't make a lot of business sense. But according to our own stated rule, that probably doesn't mean much in the high stakes deal making world. The board is clearly consolidating its view around what comes next. Guess we'll just have to stay tuned for now.

# # #

Merger of Two Unequal?

A little rationale sense would go a long way in explaining the current carnage at Citigroup and Merrill Lynch. So would some humor. Unfortunately neither is in current supply.

Before we try to insert any, here's an idea: Merge the two unequal on their way down. Or better yet, invite Bank of America to make bids on Merrill and then merge the combined entity with Citigroup. Mother Merrill always wanted to be the world's largest bank so why not give them their chance? If the supermarket approach to banking can really work, then this chain of events would quickly reveal the strategy's viability. Otherwise it's time for an alternative preferably one without interim CEOs or what http://www.breakingviews.com/ calls "need for a plumber." Sorry, but the last time that term was used in such a high profile story was when a few rogues were breaking into Watergate.

What we don't know or can't seem to figure out is why Merrill and Citigroup would act so rashly without a clear successor or even candidates in waiting to take over from O'Neal and Prince, respectively. It's not entirely explainable by lack of succession planning although that's clearly a rationale reason worth reporting.

So is the involvement of former Treasury Secretary, newly installed Chairman Robert Rubin who will now lead an effort to find a new CEO at Citi. There's only one slight problem. He fully endorsed Prince's strategy and doesn't seem to think anything is wrong about the current direction. Okay, fine. But then why push Prince to resign? To satisfy a few investment crazies mad about sub-prime? Aren't boards supposed to stand up to pressure and present continuity vs. desperation?

If anyone thinks Rubin is the type of guy who will roll up his sleeves to get a solution in place, then they need to go back and read Ken Auletta's list of works more closely. But wait. It gets better. According to The Wall Street Journal, the only other person on the Citi board with banking experience is Dick Parsons, current head of Time Warner who used to run a small investment firm earlier in his career. Sorry, but we don't think the Cable Guy qualifies as a handpicker of talent to rescue a structured investment mess. Not to mention the overseer of his own semi-failed strategy. Where's Carl Icahn when you need him?

Meanwhile, the Merrill board is probably letting out some cigar air somewhere praying that they'll stay out of the fray. But that's wishful thinking. Their board is even more in-bred and will have a hard time convincing anyone qualified for the CEO position that they'll step aside for the right person.

Both of these major institutions have dropped the ball. And since it's football and CEO turnover season, it's a safe bet that their fumble will stay live on the ground for awhile.

Perhaps the high heeled boys of Wall Street could take a cue from their burger, fries and shake brethren at McDonald's? Now there's a succession success story. Not even death of a leader could stop this brand from marching onward and upward.

# # #

Merrill Lynch CEO Snooze Fest

In the realm of CEO turnover, the pending dismissal of Merrill Lynch CEO Stanley O'Neal is a real "So What" snooze fest. Here's why:

1.) Nothing will really change from a leadership point of view. ML will get a new guy, maybe BlackRock's Mr. Fink. He'll talk a good game, hire a few new faces, move things around and then proceed to manage the balance sheet like it's the last day of his and the firm's life. But that's about the extent. Leaders don't always translate into leadership. This is proving particularly true on Wall Street these days. If anyone thinks risk as far as the eye can see behavior is going to change, then they're delusional. Case in point: The structured investment vehicle (SIV) bailout and its dwindling list of "debt on top of debt" contributors.

2.) Big banks are all the same. Very little to no differentiation. No real products or services set them apart. Insiders will argue this point vehemently. Here's a test. Go to anyone -- business and/or consumer -- who has an account with Merrill, Bank of America or Citi. Ask them point blank, "what do you get from your bank that you can't get anywhere else?" That's right. NADA, nothing. No wonder O'Neal was interested in Wachovia other than the potential payoff despite the fact he will likely get a similar amount via his separation agreement.

3.) Very little board room or palace intrigue. Unlike the Morgan Stanley drama that played out for months between Purcell, Mack and investors, Merrill Lynch is getting caught relatively flat footed. O'Neal handpicked most of the board, and with the exception of a few lone voices, there's not enough conflict to get any of the usual juices flowing. "Largest ever" loss highly damaging but not all that revealing in a forward looking turnover or succession context. Mainly because the poor judgment was so obvious. About the only thing left worth watching is how high the loss number will go, not who takes the reins.

Looking ahead...How many top people will bail out of Merrill in the coming weeks? That's where the real consequences lie, not how many millions Stanley gets to take home. Someone wake us when this one is over.

# # #

CEO Turnover: From Watch to Oust

Throw out the first ceremonial board pitch. Let the compensation pigskins fly. CEO turnover season is here.

The resignation of Gary Forsee, the now former CEO of Sprint, ushers in that rare time of year when boards conclave to "assess" their CEO leadership. Proxies are being written and rehashed, and for a chosen few, axes are getting polished. If you listen quietly from October to December, that whispering sound is scuttlebutt about who is on the way out and who is on the way in.

Forsee's resignation follows a board decision to put out a public search for new candidates. That's probably not the best way to proceed, but then again, maybe they'll get what they're looking for. No one knows except the board, which now seems to be running the company. That's never good.

Within that same sector, pay careful attention to the line between watch to oust on Ed Zander at Motorola. Different situation than Sprint, but at the core, same dilemma: Can we have trust and confidence that this CEO's leadership will propel the company's growth over the next five years? On the surface, the answer is nearly always no. But it's not the board's role to make snap decisions in a vacuum. They must think outward and long-term vs. inward in their own personal interests.

Other candidates for the Watch to Oust list include: Patricia Russo at Lucent/Alcatel, Stanley O'Neal at Merrill Lynch and Charles Prince at Citigroup. Both O'Neal and Prince have some leadership to do on recent billion dollar losses in the credit markets. Bad risk is bad risk -- we get it. But that shouldn't provide an excuse for poor judgment. They didn't provide accurate pro-active or even reactive guidance, and in Prince's case, simply compounded a string of errors that raise questions of judgment.

And while we love the touch of the Saudi Prince's endorsement of his fellow Prince reported in The Wall Street Journal, it's nearly the equivalent of New York Yankees owner George Steinbrenner coming out and saying, "Joe Torre is our man." Be very weary of public endorsements during a crisis. The outcomes are rarely positive.

# # #

FIRST

Okay, so "The Garlington Report" was the first to call the Delta CEO announcement. That's a fact that a few have noticed.

For the record, however, we were factually incorrect on at least one specific: COO Whitehurst will not resign effective immediately. Timing is beside the point as conveyed to Fortune (go to http://money.cnn.com/2007/08/21/magazines/fortune/delta_boyle.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2007082117.) Talent at that level rarely hangs around for scraps left after the power gets divvied up.

We could be wrong, but in this case, it's nearly impossible to see how a guy who made over a million dollars with Boston Consulting Group prior to joining Delta would hang around in an unclear position. Particularly after what he was able to accomplish. Listen quietly and you'll probably hear the buzz of recruiters ringing through on his BlackBerry.

High achievers want to achieve; it's not always about money. In fact, when you have that much money, it's about higher levels of success, which can include money but that's rarely the only measure.

Oh, and here's a weird nagging detail: They've given the CFO, Ed Bastian, the additional title of President while the "new guy" becomes CEO. Does that have precedence in major companies?

Someone needs to trace the relationship between Bastian and the head of the pilots union more closely. That may be more revealing than what the creditors' influence indicates.

# # #

Delta to name new CEO later today

ATLANTA (August 21, 2007) -- Delta Airlines will name current board member Richard Anderson CEO in an official company announcement later today, according to undisclosed source close to the company. Ed Bastian, current CFO, will be named president, and current chief operating officer (COO), Jim Whitehurst, will resign effective immediately. Daniel Carp will remain non-executive chairman of the board.

Naming a recently appointed board member raises questions about whether Anderson's candidacy was impartial when he joined the company's board. As The Wall Street Journal first reported earlier this month, Anderson was not present for interviews of internal candidates. This would suggest, at least perceptually, that Anderson was in it for the CEO job all along vs. the organization's long-term strategic interests. The same firm that recruited Anderson, Spencer Stuart, also recruited Carp, whom according to sources, led the search process.

This appointment also means Delta will lose arguably their strongest leadership talent responsible for turning the company around coming out of Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Whitehurst, a former BCG partner, is widely credited with some of the company's improvements in customer service and execution of the successful international expansion strategy. He is perhaps best known for orchestrating the Velvet Rope Tour, an effort to restore confidence among non-union flight attendants.

# # #

Nardelli Hit Parade

It's hard to recall a more galvanizing executive appointment than Bob Nardelli being named CEO of Cerebrus' Chrysler. No lack of opinions or views. Here's mine: http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2007-08-06-chrysler-bob-nardelli_N.htm

Not many get that level of second chance, particularly after what he left in his wake at Home Depot. The original tag to this story was, "Failing Upward." The best unpublished comments range from "this type of buffoonery is bad for capitalism" to "what's the (betting) 'over under' on his tenure?"

What to watch: Will Nardelli learn from previous mistakes? Or more importantly, hone his leadership skills? One thing is for sure. He's not going to be successful driving his original love, a Dodge Dart. Eeesh!

# # #

Delta Delay

Delta's search for a new CEO represents another delay. But not the type that leaves you in the Crown Room begging for a way out.

The challenge is two-fold: How to find someone to fill the chief post while keeping operations and the business moving continuously forward away from Chapter 11. The company says a decision isn't likely until at least the end of August when the board re-convenes. No lack of opinions out here on what they should or should not do. Some are informed while others, well...

Here's my personal favorite: "It's a cat fight to the finish between Paula Rosput (a current Delta board member and former CEO of Atlanta-based AGL Resources) and Marce Fuller, who used to run Mirant Corp. The fact that one of them (Fuller) is unemployed and the other semi-retired at a Seattle insuror makes it even more intense. Wake us when it's over."

According to an informal poll of search experts, the most likely option will be identifying a strong Chairman/CEO type along the lines of current CEO Gerald Grinstein. This person would then allow the two top internal candidates, Ed Bastian and Jim Whitehurst, to remain in their existing roles. Two other rumored contenders currently fit the bill but only one has experience operating a large airline. Daniel Carp currently serves as non-executive Chairman.

But that's all conventional wisdom. It's difficult to see how the board will just go with what's so obvious. Prior to Grinstein, there was Leo Mullin, the consummate outsider and McKinsey expert who inherited not only a flawed business model but also was forced to manage through 9/11. Some defend Mullin with great gusto, but we're not among them. It's a credibility thing. The last insider was a Delta original, Ron Allen, which, well, it's not worth turning that far back.

It's our view that the "new Delta" needs a fresh new leader, one that can continue the momentum, remain optimistic but accept a reality that no one else seems willing to: Sustained profitability for a large carrier in the current system is dreaming at best, living a lie at worst.

Would anyone like some peanuts? Okay, sorry, snack mix and complimentary beverage?

# # #

Pay to Patter

'Rahodeb' here. Ok, not really. Anyone still scratching their heads after reading the latest on Whole Foods' CEO? We're moving quickly from the issue of pay to patter. Here are some observations for your own edification:

1.) Patter matters. Ironically, digital communication now has a longer shelf life than print. Emails, IMs, Yahoo chat room postings (who has time?), you name it. All subject to ready search and fast distribution.
2.) To update an old saying, it's never the (crime) indiscretion, always the (cover-up) trail. 'Rahodeb' not alone by any stretch. High time flat footed Baby Boomer executives caught up to the realities of new media. Taking this point a step further...
3.) Digital Dumb doesn't provide a free pass to decline participation in the electronic age. Information is moving too fast for some figures, such as New Jersey Gov. Corzine, to start thinking he can claim privilege and everything will go back to the way it was before. Distinctions between official and personal don't wash publicly.

Before the Whole Foods situation explodes into a Paris-like cable news frenzy, here's the key question that their board needs to answer: When the antitrust comments first surfaced, why did the CEO (or did the CEO) fire back on his own blog? Did he know then the extent of what we all know now? And if so, then does that represent an omission that was voluntary or one endorsed by a privileged source such as a lawyer?

Better yet...Take these questions/answers and then measure against the company's stellar performance and cult-like brand status. Then and only then can the "Fire Mackey?" be deliberately answered.

# # #

Founder's Syndrome

Click here for the perfect summer read: http://www.foundread.com/view/curing-the-founders. Okay, maybe not perfect but entirely true. Take it from a founder who learned the hard way.

Inclusive Era Over Before it Started

Before anyone tries to stereotype the latest CEO casualty at Yahoo, they would benefit from taking a step back. Terry Semel's departure falls smack dab in between two widely claimed trends: Founders returning as CEOs -- insert Yang now in the CEO seat at Yahoo, Citrin at Vonage and Dell at well, you know -- and inclusive CEOs, which three Booz Allen consultants report at length in the latest issue of Strategy+Business (see link http://www.strategy-business.com/press/article/07205?gko=04dd3-1876-26242394)

In the Yahoo case, neither trend applies. It's time for the company to move away from its legacy and into areas that help grow and differentiate the business. There's no way a founder or long-time insider can accomplish turnaround on their own. Particularly in entrepreneurial companies, which Yahoo is despite their incredible rise as a brand.

Even Michael Dell, who no one would bet against, has turned outside for a rapid infusion of talent. What's the takeaway here? Performance rules. Always has, always will. Change means real change, not more of the same. Or heaven forbid, a call for "let's return to the basics."

Timeless Classic

Sometimes when you're beginning anew, it helps to consult pages from the past.

Following are excerpts from Stephen Covey's "Seven Habits of Highly Successful People," which was first published in 1989. The excerpts are not only applicable today but also quite telling about how much work remains to be done defining and applying leadership.

In many ways, Covey's original a-ha moments are just now beginning to play out on a wide scale. Leaders, companies and boards, beware. Keep ignoring these basics and be prepared to face the consequences.

"...If I try to use human influence strategies and tactics of how to get other people to do what I want, to work better, to be more motivated, to like me and each other -- while my character is fundamentally flawed, marked by duplicity and insincerity -- then in the long run, I cannot be successful. My duplicity will breed distrust, and everything I do -- even using so called human relations techniques -- will be perceived as manipulative. It simply makes no difference how good the rhetoric is or even how good the intentions are, if there is little or no trust, there is no foundation for permanent success. Only basic goodness gives life to technique.

To focus on technique is like cramming your way through school. You sometimes get by, perhaps even get good grades, but if you don't pay the price day in and day out, you never achieve true mastery of the subjects you study or develop an educated mind...

Many people with secondary greatness, that is, social recognition for their talents, lack primary greatness or goodness in their character. Sooner or later, you'll see this in every long-term relationship they have. It is character that communicates most eloquently. Then there are situations where people have character but lack communication skills and that affects relationships as well. But the effects are secondary.

...What we are communicates far more eloquently than anything we say or do. We all know it. There are people we trust absolutely because we know their character. Whether they're eloquent or not, whether they have human relations techniques or not, we trust them and work successfully with them.

In the words of William George Jordan, "Into the hands of every individual is given marvelous power for good or evil -- the silent, unconscious, unseen influence of his (or her) life. This is simply the constant radiation of what man (or woman) really is, not what he (or she) pretends to be."

Fast forward to today. Try applying this timeless summary to your own behavior and spheres of influence. If that's too difficult, then use these words as criteria to evaluate the next leadership crisis that lands in the news. Chances are the aforementioned qualities will be either on full display or entirely absent.

True or False? Leaders, take the test

Following summarizes the leading true/false rules straight out of the executive leadership lab. From the candidate and search points of view. Ranked in order of most commonly heard, experienced and/or ill conceived.
1) Executive recruiters are my best source of career advice. False. Recruiters work mostly for companies, not individuals. While some do a better job helping individuals than others, their interests are not generally aligned with your own. Personal and professional networks account for more than 60 percent of all new jobs, while recruiters represent six to eight percent. As clear as this to some, actions tend to suggest otherwise. Anyone who says they work the client and talent side equally simply isn't telling the truth.
2) What I've accomplished to date will always apply. True with a caveat. Best summed up by the title of guru coach Marshall Goldsmith's latest book, "What Got You Here Won't Get You There." Everyone has special talents and accomplishments. Key is making sure those apply to potential new positions first, our own egos second. Fundamental rule but grossly overlooked in our transaction heavy culture.
3) What I do or offer matters more than who I am. Increasingly false. Particularly at the CEO and board levels. Character counts. According to another guru, Stephen Covey, nearly three-quarters of all leadership failures can be attributed to character flaws. That percentage is based on empirical research of more than 50,000 subjects cited in "The 8th Habit." Please don't make us cite the page number.
4.) Work with passion is a passing fad. False. Remember the old saying, "do something you love and you'll never have to work a day in your life?" Dreamy yet true over time. All the great ones exemplify work with passion. They don't necessarily love their jobs every day, but they generally do something that they like and/or believe in a majority of the time.
5.) The law of reciprocity applies more than half the time. False. A personal favorite. Taught at ad nauseam in the management schools and seminars, this rule is only true 20 to 30 percent of the time, not 50 percent, the generally cited figure. If you doubt this point, then consult any major figure who has to produce or generate revenue tied to himself or herself. The honest ones will vouch.

The New Economy is Here. Oh, wait, not that New Economy.

There are always more questions than answers for the thoughtfully uncertain. Lately, however, even that truism is out of kilter.

CEOs and boards are under attack. We get it. But why does that mean leaders have to fall back on their heels? Is it because they’re scared, paranoid, beholden to investors or all of the above? The Cs have every right to be scared but running scared is not an option. We desperately need more to step up and act more boldly and broadly. Rolling over isn’t going to cut it nor is "going green," the latest bandwagon movement.

If investors don’t hold under-performing companies accountable, who will? Self-governing boards? Government? Management? Ok, this isn’t a trick question. None of the above. Investors and those who genuinely want to see more value are the only ones with an ability to impact change. Minus a few exceptions, companies and their managers can’t be left to their own devices. And that’s just it. Managers don’t always make leaders despite off-the-shelf training tools and off-site pow-wows.

Is a PEG coming to a company near you? Major private equity groups, or PEGs for short, are scouring the pads for businesses flush with cash flow that they can load up with debt and then turn around and sell. That much we know. What we don’t really know is how they do it entirely. Largely because they’re private. Maybe that’s a good thing? For more on the talent repercussions, please visit http://www.pointofviewllc.com/views_and_news.html.

Recession coming or merely another blip and dip in the gyrating global economy? Who knows. What we do know: The housing industry has a long way to go before hitting complete bottom, consumer spending continues to see-saw and the U.S. personal savings rate is negative. Employment, a lagging indicator, remains strong as does the stock market, a leading indicator. That combo. normally bodes well for growth but evidently not always. Could it be...we're in The New Economy that so many yammered about back during the Bubble?

April Pointe

Language and its ugly step cousin, communication, represent a true Catch 22. Never before have so many waxed on about the importance of these areas. Never before have so many come up short. Sorry, but we have to ask why?

The first reason is obvious. Effective use of language is not openly rewarded in the executive marketplace. It's one of those traits that everyone is supposed to have (insert the term "commodity") but so few do (insert "value.") The only time language and communication are rewarded usually comes at the ninth hour when someone wakes up to realize something has to be done.

The second reason is language and communication aren't taught effectively in schools. Colleges, b-schools, grammar schools, you name it. Few remain in command. When Strunk and White wrote their classics on style and grammar, not even these two masters could have predicted how email and the Internet would demote the value of language.

The next reason, and last one for Pointe purposes, is language and other matters of the executive brain have been largely outsourced to consultants, underpaid writers and other so called literary types called ghost writers, my personal favorite. Even political operatives such as Frank Luntz have emerged as experts. Too bad he couldn't have had more influence with the Bush administration. "Surge" ranks as one of the all-time worst word choices at a most inopportune time. On the other side, "war is lost" may be direct, but it's not what most would call a wise choice of terms.

Leaders, quit ignoring language at your peril. Read, write, listen and/or go to a seminar. Stop and think clearly before the next communication. Get outside help if you must. Your audiences may not clap loudly, but they will welcome continuous improvement.

# # #

Hypocrisy Is Alive and Well

It’s fairly safe to conclude that Don Imus and Steve Heyer aren’t boyhood chums. Imus needs no introduction unless you’ve been under a rock for the past five days.

Steve Heyer is the outgoing CEO of Starwood Hotels. He was forced to resign recently after an anonymous letter was sent to the board accusing him of indiscriminate behavior with female employees.

Moving intros. aside, here’s why these two are worth examining in a leadership context.

Institutions dependent on the almighty dollar – in these cases, boards and advertisers – nearly always come off as hypocritical when controversy surfaces. The normal modus operandi is outrage first, action second. The action, however, nearly always exceeds the crime, particularly when the institution is caught red handed for having it both ways.

Don Imus generates $50 million in revenue for NBC and CBS radio. Yet one slip up, albeit major, now threatens to derail a 35-year career. Largely because, despite how it may seem on the surface, money comes first, principle second. Watching the firestorm erupt, you would have thought Don himself had burned a cross in Al Sharpton’s yard.

This is no defense of what Imus said. It was wrong. What makes it hypocritical is how advertisers are bailing out after benefiting for years off his routine, which featured far raunchier and incendiary comments than “nappy headed hos.”

Turning to another highly charged environment, corporate board rooms, the ouster of Steve Heyer confirmed what his track record had left before. Hard charging, acerbic, controversial and dismissing the status quo.

When an anonymous letter accusing him of misconduct surfaced, Heyer either decided to leave the company or was forced to resign, depending on how you want to read the situation. Perception ruled again with an iron fist. You’re guilty. And away he went.

Simple question: Why would the board hire someone who was essentially thrown out of his previous two jobs and then act surprised when controversy surfaced? Answer: Because when you’re fighting the “war for talent,” you’ll do anything to land a star performer who can generate higher returns, which Heyer did. Again, greed first, principle second.

Imus and Heyer are just part and parcel of this trend, which unfortunately is more of a continuous movie reel than it is an issue anyone is willing to address, much less accept.

# # #

Dig deeper

Two crises, same common thread: Business leadership under attack.

In one corner of the ring punching and jabbing like life depends on it is David Neeleman, CEO of JetBlue Airlines. You would be, too, if your business had completely broken down for the world to see on Lover's Day, or what some have quickly labeled the Valentine's Day Massacre. "We've been JetBlued" has now entered the traveler lexicon. But that's another story.

In the other corner, not really jabbing but taking wide swings is Ken Lewis, CEO, Bank of America, which has been singled out for peddling credit cards to illegal immigrants. The company would tell you otherwise. What made the program highly controversial were 24 percent APR interest rates on cards marketed in Los Angeles' Hispanic community. Whether the immigrants were legal or illegal misses the larger business point.

The easy conclusion to draw here is obvious: CEOs under attack for their company's performance and bad behavior. How each has handled their respective crises, however, bears further examination. So do exploring the sum of their experiences, the forgotten variable often overlooked when reporting about monolithic companies.

Neeleman is a devout Mormon with nine children. His first experience in business was observing his grandfather's convenience store, where if a product sold out, he would run down to the nearest supermarket and buy more of the item in demand. A self described sufferer of Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD), Neeleman dropped out of a college to start a travel agency. He then founded an airline which was subsequently sold to Southwest Airlines whose CEO at the time was Herb Kelleher, an entrepreneurial legend in his own right. According to a previously published profile in Fortune magazine, Neeleman was fired after about five months on the job. By the time he started JetBlue in 1999, it's safe to say that he had experienced just about every up and down (no pun intended) an airline executive could experience.

Now juxtapose this personal history with Ken Lewis, the iron clad CEO of Bank of America, which has witnessed incredible growth under his watch. Lewis joined what was then NCNB in 1969 as a credit analyst and worked his way up to the top job through grit and determination over 30 years. No small feat in its own right.

Ok, interesting personal histories. But what's the point? We are framed by influences, events and experiences that create who we are. Leaders, however, are held to a higher standard. Hence the term, “leadership.” It's their responsibility to help others adapt and respond to change, which often rears its ugly side through crises.

Applying this rule to the Neeleman and Lewis examples, who do you think is more suited to lead?

The short answer is we won't know for awhile. JetBlue has to re-earn the trust and confidence of customers, which is no easy task with or without a "bill or rights." Bank of America seems to have weathered its storm despite not appearing to be forthright and visible on the controversial credit program.

Neeleman has chosen a star-driven public profile, appearing on the David Letterman show and in other countless formats to answer criticism. Other than an op-ed on the Wall Street Journal’s sympathetic editorial page, Lewis has remained relatively tight lipped like a good banker always is taught to be. Different strokes for different folks. Savvy public relations can only provide air cover for so long.

The harder answer to the leadership suitability question generally requires digging deeper beyond the surface, which regrettably, our attention spans do not allow. Whether Neeleman and Lewis meet some unknown threshold may make good news, but it doesn't produce any lasting lesson. A far more productive exercise would be if more business leaders could apply their core values, assuming they have some, to the issues at hand. Then we might get somewhere on the trust and confidence meter.

# # #

In the News

Following is an excerpt from a recent USA Today piece that quotes yours truly. For the full article, please go to http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/management/2007-02-02-comeback-ceos-usat_x.htm. Dell is more about namesakes reclaiming their brand than boomerang CEOs. But why quibble.
===========================================

Dell joins ranks of once-hot trend: Boomerang CEOs

By Del Jones, USA TODAY (All Rights Reserved)

Does Michael Dell signal a new era of the "comeback kid?"

When he was rehired late Wednesday, Dell became the first so-called boomerang CEO to be brought back to rescue a Fortune 500 company since 2005. Dell, 41 and founder of the PC maker (DELL), replaced Kevin Rollins, 54, who was Dell's hand-picked replacement two years ago.

Boomerangs used to be common. From 1999-2003 an average of 10 former CEOs were brought back each year at the largest 1,500 companies, so many that it prompted Ohio State assistant finance professor Rudi Fahlenbrach to co-author a study published last November called "The Market for Comeback CEOs."

But there were no boomerang CEOs at Fortune 500 companies in 2006 and just two in 2005 (at TJX Cos. and First Data (FDC)), says Leslie Gaines-Ross, chief reputation strategist at Weber Shandwick...

Michael Dell is a true comeback kid at one year younger than Steve Jobs when Jobs returned to Apple in 1997 to begin his iPod curtain call and oversee a stock rise approaching 2,000%. Jobs is also an atypical boomerang CEO because most leave again within three years, or just long enough to right the company and line up proper succession planning.

It won't be easy for Michael Dell to mimic Jobs, says Jeremy Garlington, who runs an executive leadership consultancy. Unlike Apple, Dell is in an industry "racing to the bottom of the commodity barrel. No one will bet against Michael Dell, but even he would have to admit that a turnaround could take a long time," Garlington says...

# # #

Earth to Michael Dell and Phil Kent

Ok, one name is quite familiar and speaks for itself. Michael Dell will have his hands full trying to turn Dell Computer around. The Apple Steve Jobs analogy is apt but lacks one key detail: Jobs didn't make it all the way back the first time around. It was only later on a second better timed tour of duty that he got Apple back on track. Does anyone remember John Sculley?

Phil Kent is the CEO of Turner Broadcasting, which runs The Cartoon Network. Their promotional brilliance around a sketch called, "Aqua Teen Hunger Force," (no, we're not making this up) caused quite the terror shock yesterday in Boston. Some light boards featuring the characters were mistaken for bomb devices by local authorities. Springing into action, Kent and Turner issued a long winded statement apologizing for the screw-up, which was obviously bungled by a third-party marketing vendor that no one was managing properly. The vendor's employee mug on cable last night being led out of his residence said it all.

It's an odd situation to say the least, but anyone who recalls the H-P spying case from last year will remember how the same type of vendor arrangement was blamed at the outset. Different issue entirely with thankfully less harmful of an outcome. If Kent is with it, he'll go on "The Comedy Show" with Jon Stewart and the Boston airwaves and take his lumps. No way out of this one without some action, sincerity and self deprecating humor that toes the line. One last question: Did anyone think about picking up the phone and calling the Boston police chief to apologize and lend support? These "devices" were evidently in place for weeks, according to callers to a local radio call-in show. Amazing...

# # #

The HD Roller Coaster

Get ready for a wild ride following last week's abrupt resignation of Bob Nardelli as Chairman and CEO of Home Depot. This one makes no real business sense so chalk it up to the powerful personalities involved. Hard to see how the "new guy" fits over the long term...

Following is an excerpt from last week's mainstream coverage (Atlanta Journal & Constitution, 1/4/07):

Management experts say Nardelli's driven personality overshadowed his accomplishments at Home Depot. Sales doubled under Nardelli, to more than $81.5 billion, and earnings per share rose more than 140 percent.

"At some point, he turned himself into the story, and there's an old rule in crisis situations: You don't let yourself become the story," said Jeremy Garlington, an Atlanta-based executive coach and managing partner of Point of View LLC. "Under Nardelli, Home Depot had record profits and record revenues, but the stock price was stagnant. It doesn't make sense from a business standpoint ... but business often comes down to personalities and relationships, not figures."

Two Quintessential Americans, One Common Theme

The Godfather of Soul and the Accidental President may not have had much in common, but both will be remembered for their unique contribution to pop culture and leadership. Can you say the same?

Legacies have a way of separating the truly thoughtful leader from the not so thoughtful. Lasting, living and otherwise. How we're remembered is always impacted by what we're doing in the present -- even when the outcome is not entirely clear.

Here's an excerpt from Gerald Ford's strongest political foe turned world ambassador, former President Jimmy Carter: "An outstanding statesman, he wisely chose the path of healing during a deeply divisive time in our nation's history...One of the most admirable public servants and human beings I've ever known."

That may be an understatement. Ford will be most recalled not for falling down the stairs, which he did, but for pardoning Richard Nixon, which closed the final chapter of Watergate or so it seemed at the time.

During the same era, James Brown, who died on Christmas Day, was lighting it up as a soul and funk singer. His greatest legacy may best be summarized through the song lyric, "I Feel Good." Or Get up...Get on Up."

Get on Up, indeed. Leaders everywhere should heed this call and determine what they want their legacy to be -- preferably before it's handed to them.

'Tis the Season

'Tis the season to evaluate and plan. Here are 10 tomes to help advance the process:
1. Clutter. Get rid of it. Any and all extraneous material or paper. Chances are there's another copy somewhere anyway.
2. Eliminate cliches once and for all. "Talent management" seems to have pushed aside "leadership development" to no avail. "War for talent" should be erased for eternity. But that's another story.
3. Coaching vs. advising. It seems as though everyone is a coach these days. Sigh. How many can honestly say that they consistently provide selfless advice and service? Tough question with no perfect answers.
4. Don't discount 2007 as an off election year. It's make or break time on a host of matters, most of which centers around a War that no one wants to acknowledge but wants to go away.
5. Change or Else. It's our adopted theme for the coming year so please hold us to the fire. Right now it's somewhere between a seminar/speaking topic and new partnerships and affiliations. Stay tuned for more in the coming year.
6. Dancing with the Transformation Stars. We're desperately in search of figures, executives, etc. who have demonstrated successful transformation from one profession or station to another entirely new field or endeavor. Key criteria: They lived to tell about it.
7. True success. Hint: Try defining success on your own terms and see what you come up with. Answers may startle you.
8. Embrace fears or insecurities instead of running from them. Easier said than done but critical. Far too few practice this one.
9. Laugh, think and cry. The late great Jimmy Valvano (former basketball coach for N.C. State University for you non-sports types) had it right with his daily motto: Laugh, think and cry and your day will be complete. Tissues, anyone?
10. Finally, instead of worn out resolutions, try this exercise: Where are you going to create the most value next year? For whom and with whom?

Attention: Executives in Transition

If you're someone going through career or job change (hint: all of us at any given time), following are some not so subtle tips on how to manage transition:

1.) Clarity is leadership. Be absolutely clear with your intentions even if you don't know what they are. Taking time off? Fine, do so with a stated purpose and specific time frame. Periods of transition are the last time to be unclear about what you're trying to accomplish.
2.) Lose the money obsession. Now, this isn't to say leave money on the table, or in BellSouth's case, forgo a lucrative severance package for an unproven opportunity. That's not the point. De-emphasize money on your list of considerations. Most motivation driven solely by money ends up wreaking havoc later.
3.) Help and serve others. The natural tendency during uncertainty is to focus on Self at all costs. But this is bone-headed for multiple reasons. Help others, and new paths will unwind. Don't become over-isolated or consumed with reflection.
4.) Passion and purpose. Passion and purpose are two of the most widely cited yet misunderstood variables of job and career change. Yes, you need to get excited about what you do everyday. But that doesn't mean passion is a cure all. "Life's purpose" also is a career myth. What we're doing today is purpose for all intents and purposes (no pun intended.)
5.) Career? What career? Consult any successful figure. Chances are they'll tell you while they may have had a career in the conventional sense, it never seemed that way because they were pursuing something much more meaningful.

These tips are brought to you by Jeremy Garlington, managing partner of Point of View, LLC. For more information, please visit www.pointofviewllc.com or reach him directly at 404-606-0637. Thanks for reading. Good luck managing your transition.

Hot Air

So it's August, the doggiest days of summer. Many have either been on vacation or are headed that way. Here's an advisory: Beware of hot air, the leadership kind. At last check, there was a lot of talking going on without much action.

First, however, we have to recognize the grand exceptor, Warren Buffett, for his gift to the Gates Foundation. It is absolutely without compare. Buffett's stamp of leadership was taking the action without much fanfare, while at the same time, demonstrating wit, self awareness and humor.

The lesser mortal CEO crowd unfortunately can't say the same. Whether it's back dating or springing forward options, executive pay hangs around their neck like an albatross. But instead of thinking through various dimensions, some fire back with inane comments such as these: "We have an enterprise that stands tall among corporations here in America...The last thing you want to do is withdraw into a fetal position on some of this stuff."

Fair enough. But leaders don't spit out defensive speak. They calibrate and act according to their audiences' will, which is fed up with single dimensionality. If you don't mean what you say or aren't willing to accept views from a multitude of voices, then shut thy mouth. We won't even go there with politicians. To borrow some Yoda speak, political leadership in an election year, you will not find. Leadership may be a journey. But it's not an bottomless pit where words replace action. Never has, never will.

# # #

Upcoming seminar

Here's an upcoming audio seminar that some may want to tune into:

Brand 101: What Every Executive Recruiter Should Know
A 90-Minute Audio Conference Featuring Jeremy Garlington,
Managing Partner, Point of View LLC
Friday, August 18, 2006 – 1 P.M. EST
Register

Are you a brand? The harsh truth is most individual recruiters are not brands, according to the term's conventional meaning. Branding, or the act of creating brand, has shoved aside the process' true value, which is defining and keeping a unique promise in clients' hearts and minds.

Join Kennedy Information and presenter Jeremy Garlington for this seminar and explore how brand building can be properly integrated within standard business and search practices.

Designed specifically for individual leaders, content will address the intersections between personal leadership and organizational brand.

Knowledge and insights you'll take back to your organization:
*Brand vs. branding – what the terms really mean
*What we can learn from industry leaders
*How to create differentiation, with yourself, practice and firm
*Proven techniques and tips for establishing and communicating a brand promise
*The dos and don'ts of effective brand building

Experienced search consultants, or those aspiring to reach new heights, will discover new ways of thinking – both about themselves and their firms.

Jeremy Garlington – Managing Partner, Point of View LLC

Jeremy Garlington is an executive coach and branding consultant who specializes in working with retained executive recruiters and search firms. He currently serves as managing partner of Point of View, LLC, an executive leadership consultancy in Atlanta.

Know (and Be) Yourself

When the hit TV show, “American Idol” crowned its 2006 winner last night, millions of viewers suddenly embraced a somewhat awkward contestant named Taylor Hicks. The premature gray haired 30-something from Birmingham, Ala., had not only survived the competition, but he had won after 63 million votes being cast.

What few have been willing to admit, however, is how Hicks represented something alien from the image that the hit show had created through its five-year run.

Here was a relative country boy, older than most contestants brandishing about, letting out rebel yells and one line chants called, “The Soul Patrol.” Judges liked him, although Simon Cowell looked incredulous at times about Hicks’ ability to advance. Late night comedians had a field day when it looked as though Hicks was going to make the final round.

But what made this unlikely winner stand out from the competition? Hicks did nothing more than be himself. He sang songs that he knew, felt comfortable doing and when he stumbled, he simply admitted to it and kept on going. Hicks’ self deprecating style soon endeared him to fans everywhere, and his following ultimately made the difference in winning the contest.

What do figures such as Taylor Hicks and visible business leaders have in common? Well, for starters, scrutiny. Hicks withstood weeks of heady competition and fishbowl review on national television. Viewers watched for any potential strength or flaw that could affect his standing. Questions such as, “can this guy really be the next American Idol?” passed through more than one conversation, blog or other shared communication.

In the end, Hicks and his Soul Patrol emerged victorious, while the rest of us remained mere mortals.

The familiar saying that first you have to know yourself to be a winning leader has never been truer. But there’s a subtle shift going on. Know yourself is only half the battle. The other more critical half is be yourself. At all times and especially when others are watching.

Rants and Raves

Rant number one goes to dishonesty in the immigration debate, an issue that affects everyone so much that no one can adequately address, much less do anything about. Terms such as “amnesty” and “illegal alien” have been spun out of control. Business leaders would be wise to step up with a stronger voice. But they’re in the back seat. Perhaps it’s a La Katrina giving hangover?

Rant number two goes to executive pay. This issue registers off the charts on opinion surveys, yet no one has a credible viewpoint on what can be done. Vanguard founder J. Bogel comes close, but isn't he a big money man? Someone from within the governance complex, preferably not a shareholder shill, needs to shed light on how to find more balance between pay for performance and pay for failure. It's difficult to see how self governing boards can address the issue adequately on their own.

Now the good stuff. Here are several raves that exemplify effective leadership:

Warren Buffett for stepping off the Coke board while proposing that director pay be strictly based on the company's performance. Odd nod since members are already multi-millionaires. But solid move nonetheless. We will hold off on questions about his purchase of Russell Athletic...

CNN's Lou Dobbs. Like or loathe him, Dobbs has unmasked hypocrisy in the immigration debate. Steam comes out of his ears some nights. Off-the-charts point of view...

Jamie Dimon, J.P. Morgan Chase. Wall Street dudes haven’t made many most admired lists in recent years, but this guy looks and sounds real. Anyone who could put his dukes up in a cover shot for Fortune magazine (April 3, p. 54) gets a rave on hubris alone...

Charles Brewer, original Mindspring founder now chairman of Green Street Properties and leader of New Urbanism. Leadership, transformation, values-driven. Need we say more?

# # #

Who are YOU?!?

In deference to the legendary rock band with similar lyrics, the question isn’t, WHO are You? It’s more about that dreaded first impression remark from someone who doesn’t know you: Who are YOU?!?

Personal and professional journeys are pre-occupied with trying to instill a sense of who we are, both within ourselves and others. We all want the same thing: To be recognized, known and/or recalled for what we want others to know us by.

But there’s a catch. We never fully get to answer Who are You? The audience does.

Comedian/actor Albert Brooks, not to be confused with Mel Brooks, says that even after 25+ years of performing comedy, he doesn’t know what makes people laugh other than the unexpected. Brooks’ newest work, “Looking for Comedy in the Muslim World,” cuts through the seriousness of global politics with biting humor to connect with everyday hearts and minds in India.

Howard Stern, the new king of satellite radio, personifies the saying, “true geniuses are misunderstood.” After his latest deal with Sirius, it may need to read ‘performing geniuses are misunderstood all the way to the bank.’ Say what you want about Stern, FCC standards and the chimp- like state of radio. Fact remains that he has created one of the largest, most loyal followings ever achieved by a single individual in any field.

Even the Godfather movie series has its own special stamp called The Code of Silence. Good or evil, pale or bloody, you knew where the family stood at all times. There wasn’t anything morally upright about what transpired, yet clarity was always achieved.

Corporate and business leaders cling to the notion that influence is determined strictly by pulling their own chosen control levers. But that’s simply not true, and it may never have been. Throw in a crisis and this axiom moves even further away from reality.

Similar to performing artists, business leaders are only as good as their audience. If no one believes what you’re saying, nothing of lasting value will be created. It’s true in Hollywood, and it’s true in business despite heavy denial to the contrary.

Know your audience on multiple levels: professionally, personally and otherwise. Identify their needs and offer valid, valuable insights. Dare to break through the conventional norms. Speak and act clearly and candidly.

When it’s all said and done, being at one with yourself and audience may be the only leadership attribute worth trying to fulfill.

Extra! Extra!

Sorry, no pithy content here. Just shameless self promotion.

If you haven't already visited the new Point of View, LLC web site, please click here www.pointofviewllc.com. Bookmark and visit often. Send the link to a friend, preferably one that's an aspiring leader with career and/or business issues.

Look for more targeted content that you can use in the weeks, months ahead.

Thanks for checking in,

JG

Diamonds in the Rough

Pick up any business publication, and you'll be treated to corporate leaders doing great (or bad) works. Some come out better than others. The business press loves to fawn over whoever is in vogue or next in line.

But what about the emerging class, or digging deeper, next generation leaders? Sorry Fortune, execs. right next to power don't constitute 'emerging' in the modern sense.

Chances are the next gen. group will never adorn cover stories or recruiters' short lists. Yet if change in the Over-Abundance Age is real, which it is, then isn't it time for this class to be heard?

There's only one slight problem. Very few inside the complex -- boards, advisors or the existing rulers themselves -- have enough courage to act collectively on what's right under their noses. And why should they? Executive salaries and bonuses are granted no matter what. No reward, financial or otherwise, is large enough to justify the risk of doing something new. Therein lies the rub. Without any change or incentive to try a different path -- or vice versa, penalty for not doing so -- everyone can expect the same old outcome.

Those trying to lead within a industry with over-abundant product -- cars, money, books/magazines, lumber, soda water, labor, etc. -- would be wise to consider more diverse sources of leadership. These diamonds in the rough could be the key to unlocking whatever value remains.

New Year's Blah-blah

Anyone had enough of New Year's resolutions yet?

Here's one that every executive-level leader should observe: Throw everything out (within reason) and start over.

Another calendar year means an entirely new set of possibilities, challenges and successes/failures.

The job or task at hand may remain the same, but chances are the external and internal environments have changed considerably.

Old thinking about old ideas will not propel growth or advancement. Until previous suppositions are challenged from every angle, nothing new and energizing is likely to emerge.

That goes for organizations and individuals.

Trends and Truths

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!

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/.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.