Leadership & Business Transformation

 The business environment is changing and companies need to adjust not only their vision and plans, but also the structure of the business processes.

The rapid development of information technology in the recent years has changed organizations dramatically. The use of technologies is much more intensive. In today's reality, more and more processes are knowledge-based and this has a specific implications for most of the companies. Combines with new business trends, it requires a rethinking process which generates transformation.

Some companies are faster than others, in terms of changing or fine tuning processes. Regardless of the size, companies must change and adapt to the ever changing reality in order to survive.  It is true not only for start-up companies, but also for big corporations. Take a look at the top 50 companies in the NASDAQ index. See how many corporations managed to stay on the top of the list in the last decades.

Management in general and business leaders in particular are expected to be the change agents.  They are accountable and should become the change catalysts. It means that leaders should re-align (if and when required) basic values, attitudes and business assumptions. Mega trends are also very important and need to be discussed accordingly. Business transformation is more than an enhanced strategic plan, as one may think. It is a strategic organization change plan.  Vision, mission and strategies are all taken into consideration.

In some cases it is possible that such process may affect not only the structure bus also the culture of the company. The one thing that will not change is the focus on the existing and potential customers.

The outcome of the transformation discussions and preparation work should be a solid plan. Then it should be executed decisively. It is not always the easiest thing to do (like any other change) but in most cases it is a must.

At the end of the transformation process the company should be able to move forward from the past state to the future state. Implemented properly, the outcome should be significant improvement in business procedures, system capabilities and eventually better business performance.  It is more likely that a more flexible, adaptive and responsive organization will prosper these days. 

Leadership and the corporate tendency to keep moving on

Big companies could be illustrated as a huge ship, sailing safely, navigating at all seas and in all weather conditions.

As such, it has huge advantages as size does matters. The ship has clear directions, the team is usually experienced and once it is on the move, it will reach its destination.

So, is it the team or the corporate tendency to keep moving on that make it what it is?

The answer, in my opinion is a combination of both, directed by great leadership. 

Creativity ownership and leadership

"Creativity is just connecting things. When you ask creative people how they did something, they feel a little guilty because they didn't really do it, they just saw something. It seemed obvious to them after a while. That's because they were able to connect experiences they've had and synthesize new things." - Steve Jobs

Yes, we are all encouraged to be creative.

Some of our time may be devoted just for that. In a startup company it means doing much more than that. Employees could and should be inspired by making something from nothing regardless of their professional expertise: sales, technical or other professional function. 

Thinking out of the pattern (or the box) is not always intuitive, but it sure creates excitement which is amazingly powerful. In some cases, one does not need to re-invent the wheel, but just re-think about something that did not work in the past, take the lead and do it differently.

Creativity ownership, leadership and innovation can make the entire difference.

Skilled and experienced people can and should be empowered by leaders. When leaders empower their team they form a direct connection to innovation and creativity.

Good managers let their team get on with their tasks so that they are happy with what they have to do. Constant monitoring and innovation just don’t go together...

Business leadership in global economic slowdown.

John F. Kennedy once said: "When written in Chinese, the word 'crisis' is composed of two characters. One represents danger and the other represents opportunity." Difficult times require fast reaction from one hand and managed change process plan, from the other hand.

It is also the time where business leadership is under enormous pressure, more than the usual, to perform in a decisive way to overcome and cope with the situation.

Some managers may choose the short term approach of dramatically cutting costs by reducing headcount. This is a very effective short-term approach which may contribute to mid-term profitability maintenance. However, it is definitely not a robust solution as the objective problem remains, and it will be much difficult to execute a growth plan with very limited resources and low morale (as a result of massive cut-downs with no long-term plan).

Profitability is not enough; it is the accelerating growth process that creates the sustainable value. The only way it could be achieved is via long-term approach.

Leaders should adjust faster and be even more agile. Sure, some immediate actions are required, but it should be part of long-term approach. Some may say that Crisis is a "great opportunity to learn" but the truth is that no one really likes recession. Leaders need to face reality and make sure that the teams are well informed and aware of the difficult situation. It is more likely that by sharing possible directions toward solutions, the teams would probably be very supportive of management’s decisions.

I am not suggesting that management or leadership is sort of popularity contest. What I say is that unpopular discussions or decision are part of the job of any leader. It should be fairly presented and shared with the teams. Eventually, it will result in support and commitment of team members.

Strong plan, supportive business leadership, empowered teams and healthy corporate culture should contribute significantly to better business preparedness in challenging times.

Succession planning: leadership challenge or opportunity?

In today's competitive markets, it is essential to maintain highly-qualified leadership talent. It is also important to the continued corporate performance. The concept is very clear, but is it easy to implement it?

The HR role is only secondary in this process; it is one of the strategic missions any business leader should face. Having said that the general expectation is that a business leader will invest in his successor. Handled properly, the business leader will gain challenged follower and motivated potential team leader.

In some cases, business managers find the above process challenging and even threatening. As simple as it sounds. Although they realize the importance of developing the potential leader' skills, they step back and stress an invisible line which makes the succession process impossible. Instead of being satisfied with their team talent development, they think about those who "outshine the master"…

Great business leaders identify and develop the skills of their team in general and for those who can replace them, in particular.

The benefit is straightforward. Successful succession planning provides the professional horizon for leadership talents. It also demonstrates the correlation between the corporate leadership requirements and long term management motivation.

Succession planning, in my opinion, is not just an opportunity. It is a strategic investment opportunity.

Meir

Leadership examination: admit or hide a critical mistake?

Let's describe hypothetical situation, just for the sake of this discussion.

You are a new MD and you need to make some courageous decisions. You have no previous experience as MD and you try to postpone some of the decisions till the very last minute. Then you finally make a decision.

2 months later, you do realize that you have made a big mistake. This is a critical mistake which effect badly one of the areas under your responsibility. You have the perspective required to acknowledge the fact that you are responsible for the given situation. The question is what do you do?

Do you admit that you have made a mistake? By doing so, you may be risking your new role reputation as you are constantly under the spotlight.  Your future and credibility are on the stake here…  Looking at the bright side, you will be known as a leader who set an example, admit mistakes and correct what is needed, accordingly. It is difficult and takes courage, but it is the right thing to do as a leader.

The alternative is burying or hiding your mistake. It may be easier in the short term, as your reputation will not be harmed (yet). However, from the nature of mistakes, errors tend to intensify as time goes by. Moreover, you will need to deal with the consequences in the middle and long term, working harder to compensate or even cover your error. Choosing this approach you may maintain your reputation as a good manager, capable of handling difficult tasks…

The two options mentioned above reflects, in my opinion, the fundamental difference between a leader and manager. It is way beyond the concept of admitting a mistake.

Considering the above situation, what would you do? Which approach would you choose in such circumstances?

Looking forward to receiving your comments.

Meir

Leadership, innovation and courageous decisions

Leadership and innovation means making bold decisions.

One cannot lead or innovative without a measure of courage. Take away courageous decisions, and innovation and leadership lose their potency. Leaders are accountable for the decisions they make. Leaders should celebrate successful decisions and constructively evaluate those decisions that were less successful. In my opinion, innovative employees are often strong leaders.

When employees are consistently pushing growth or innovative ideas, management should recognize their potential for leadership roles.

Why every business leader needs a mentor?

My answer, to the above question, in one sentence: simply because of the honest feedback, a rare commodity in these days…

Being a business leader is complex and associates with broad responsibility. A business leader may receive feedback from his manager, peers and team members. It is amazing how many times the formal feedback tells you what you want to hear… In other cases measure of fear of repercussion is semantically noticed during feedback.

Whether formal or informal, in some cases these feedbacks are not complete and may not necessarily reflect full objectivity. There are many, diverse interests out there. For example, a manager may provide good feedback simply because "if it is not broken, do not need to fix it". Team members may be interested in pleasing or satisfying management, so constructive criticism may be limited.

Mentor feedback, however, should be very open and accurate. As such, it is much focused and probably very important, powerful tool for strategic business leadership development. There is not a strict definition for Mentor. It can be any trusted person, with relevant experience who can contribute significantly to the mentee development. Successful Mentorship could be achieved provided that one is fully committed to the development process.

Career development plans, formal training and performance reviews are important tools, but may not be enough, considering the broad nature of business leadership. Winning organizations should encourage mentoring either on formal or informal (yet structured) basis.

Every great leader that I know had a great role model as a mentor

Leadership plays a decisive role in enhancing employee commitment

Retaining the talent that has already been recruited is a must in today's competitive marketplace. 

As a business leader I do believe that good leadership has a profound effect on retention. It is the honest feedback mechanism that positively fine tunes the sense of member worth and purpose. 

A commitment to stay in a given workplace is also influenced by a perceived connection between work and the organization’s mission. Leaders should be able to reflect that. It is clear that Leadership is a very influential variable affecting job satisfaction, commitment and willingness to stay.

How large size corporations can be even greater businesses?

Big companies could be illustrated as a huge ship, sailing safely and navigating at all seas and in all weather conditions.

Sure, as such, it has huge advantages as size does matters. The ship has clear directions, the team is experienced and once it is on the move, it will reach its destination.

Working with startups I have identified a few gaps (comparing to large size corporations) which should be re-considered:

1. Creativity ownership and leadership – yes, we are all encouraged to be creative. Some of our time may be devoted just for that. Yet in a startup, it means doing much more than that. Employees could and should be inspired by making something from nothing regardless of their professional expertise, sales tech or other professional function. Thinking out of the pattern (or the box) is not always intuitive, but it sure creates excitement which is amazingly powerful. In some cases, one does not need to re-invent the wheel, but just re-think about something that did not work in the past, take the lead and do it differently. It can make the entire difference. They can ask me how…

2. The importance of information flow. There will always be information that isn’t shared in big companies. I am not speaking about confidential financial figures or strategy but rather processes which affect the organization and presented in the very last moment. This is common information which handled on a "need to know basis" till it is common knowledge. In most cases this is not an intentional corporate method, but the general perception is that the team are not always part of a "greater" cause. Sharing "unclassified" information can make great deal improving the sense of belonging.

3. From Human Resources to Talent Management – everyone is a talent today. Do we really manage talent properly? It may sound like a rhetorical question, but it is not. The talent management starts during the recruitment phase and should involve other talents from existing team (and not only hiring manager and HR function). Once on board, there should be a coherent synchronization between performance evaluation and individual growth plan. If it could also be linked to the team cause / roadmap / development strategy, it could intensify the success on individual as well as team levels.

The above reflects my ideas and opinions. It may make sense to some of you, but I can also assume that these words would probably fade along the sea trail generated by the big ships…

Just some food for thought.

Meir

Leadership vs Management

Business leadership is required to gain commitment rather than just compliance to working tasks. It is also required to ensure endurance, a persistence that mere authority can’t generate.

In some respects, the role of a business leader is to attain those things that management alone is unlikely to attain. A position of authority may give a manager a ‘jump start’ in achieving business missions, but commitment may fade without leadership.

I strongly believe that leadership in any business should focus as much on the characteristics of followers as it does on attributes of the leader.

Business leaders must accept responsibility for others, model values by example, develop the team through praise and shape a team culture. By taking care of the team and empowering each member, business results will follow accordingly.

Business leaders work in an environment of ongoing change. How are we moving change forward?

Strong leadership sponsorship with a clear charter and time-frame for implementation is required.

There should also be a clear project plan, with accountabilities defined. As always, a leader need to make sure that the right team is well placed.

Business leaders should embrace change and help others embrace change as well. The more proactive and structured the approach is, the better one can address the people and organizational risks inherent in any change effort.

Effective and honest feedback process: is it difficult to be fair?

The above seems like a straightforward, simple question. It should not be difficult to be honest. Is it?


No one is in perfect… yet honest and fair feedback process should weight all aspects, good and bad. One should consider inquiring about what worked well and what could be improved. Both views should be equally weighted and considered in the same proportion.

This is extremely important if one asks an opinion or feedback from a team member, regarding peers or managers. Asking balanced questions should be the best way to see the full picture and not in a tendentious manner (intentioned or not). Asking one an un-adjusted questions or "begging the question" in one direction, miss the entire feedback point. It may also cause a gap of expectations from the procedure. In such cases the results are un-fairly clear, known in advance and therefore biased.

Reflecting about such process one should make sure that the purpose of the evaluation is fully transparent. Thinking about how the questions should be rephrased to these supposed to provide feedback is equally important. Try to avoid leading question, use open questions instead, just to make sure that there is no "hidden direction". Asking questions like "How bad is your peer" or "Can you provide examples of bad behavior of your colleague" are obviously leading questions.

I have observed a situation which looked like a kind of an "informal fallacy" where the conclusion that one was attempting to prove was included in the initial premises of the questions. Needless to say, it was an unprofessional feedback process. For the external witness It looked like a "field trial" more than a "fair trial". 

I strongly think that perfect objectivity is an unrealistic goal; fairness, however, is not. Be fair.

Business leadership - doing the right thing

Successful companies devote time and efforts thinking and implementing core corporate values.

There might be various business conduct rules, expected behavior guidelines and general instructions concerning anticipated performance. There is one thing in common for all: it is all about doing the "right thing".

It may sound like a general statement, however, if someone is doing the right things, consistently, then about 90% of the rules are already built in. This is also what integrity is all about. Integrity can be summed up simply as doing the right thing for the right reason.

Corporate values need to be demonstrated. In order to develop these shared values, the leadership must transmit a sense of honesty and integrity to each member of the organization.
It was Dwight D. Eisenhower, who said: "The supreme quality for leadership is unquestionably integrity. Without it, no real success is possible, no matter whether it is on a section gang, a football field, in an army, or in an office.”

I could not agree more…

What differentiates a high performance team from a regular team?

In one word: "commitment". Commitment can be achieved by focusing on four elements:

1. Setting clear mission and goals. Identifying specific, measurable, prioritized goals and deliverables linked to the business.

2. Setting clear roles and responsibilities, contributing required skills and resources for the team to accomplish its goals. 

3. Identifying and agreeing on the procedures and approaches the team will use for getting its work done.

4. Building the necessary openness, trust, motivation and operating rhythm for a high performance team.

Winning team members are proud of the job they do and the corporation they work for when the corporation is making a meaningful contribution to society.

Should leaders, encourage mistakes on their team?

John Maxwell stated in his book "Failing Forward" that honest mistakes should actually be encouraged, not just tolerated.

William L. McKnight, who served as 3M chairman of the board from 1949 to 1966, encouraged 3M management to "delegate responsibility and encourage men and women to exercise their initiative.". He also mentioned that "Management that is destructively critical when mistakes are made kills initiative. And it's essential that we have many people with initiative if we are to continue to grow."(Source: http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/3M/en_WW/History/3M/Company/McKnight-principles )

Planned as it may be, when someone tries out new things failures are likely to happen. Some companies like to talk about giving employees the freedom to make mistakes. Only a few found a way to incorporate possible chance into company policy. Take Google, for example. Google has placed guidelines around employees’ use of their “20% time”. It is the one day a week an employee spends on side projects. Is it a waste of time, learning process or platform for building the next big thing?

I do think that tolerating honest mistakes and giving employees the freedom to explore creates a culture of learning and innovation. I would say that the key to driving innovation is providing a nurturing environment where employees feel encouraged to take risks and make courageous decisions.