No sector is seems is not effected by the current economic downturn, recession or crisis – you choose the term you dislike most. However the rush to reduce, re-size and remodel is to me a symptom of panic and pressure to act rather than the product of rational thought and considered action. Big corporate have the pressure of the shareholder to think about so need to make a profit at all costs – what is not so obvious to some is that their shareholder are in many cases their employees pension funds so meeting one criteria for success fails another.
What should we do as a alternative ? because we all know criticism is easy but generating alternatives is not. Well I don’t know many organizations that hire dumb people out of choice – even the White House has got that one now . Given the scale of the challenge, given the limited off the shelf options for a business in recession, why not take some risks – more risk with the people you have ’s ideas.
Take the scenario of a small business who employee 40- 50 people in distribution and logistics. When there is less work and costs of employment are constant the option off the shelf is to reduce the staff. Lower staff number to match the reduction in work available and match the reduced cost base. Clear and logical and expected from the management. So lets say 10 people loose their jobs to meet the downturn, harsh but fair. Or is it ! What would happen if the same 40 – 50 people where given the task of income generation, cost reduction, business remodeling, sales generation, business marketing, asset reuse, space leasing, alternative income raising and growth rather than death by a thousand cuts. I think they might as a collective with the right leadership generate ideas and plans and product and ways of using their existing asset that the management , because of their training, would not see in a million years.
Is this the rant of a delusional mind – possibly but if you look for them ( and I do) there are examples of businesses doing remarkable things ( from the ideas of their workforce) when the business is under pressure. If you want to read about some incredible employee ideas for success read Maverick, by Ricardo Semler. You will see quite quickly that re organizing, re structuring, re engineering are the reactions of an anorexic mind – feed it with ideas from your people and grow healthy as an organization.
I work on a programme for one of the large European telecoms groups, dealing with cross border management. The delegates get two modules of input, one specifically dealing with the issues related to culture in a national sense, so one countries approach to life and work vs another, and the second module, the one I work on is about leading people and change in a cross border context.
What is interesting for me to see, is how people who have to manage across borders struggle to recognize what it is that needs to be focused on. Without doubt managing people in remote offices from a central point is difficult, and demands more skill and forethought than an intact co -located team. However, cultural differences are no more an issue than say, experience differences in two team members, or even personality differences. Culture is one lens for looking at diversity and not a separate and somehow special category of management science. At least that’s is how I have always experienced it. So a Japanese manager who really does not like to listen and does not value the opinion of his staff, is not necessarily doing this because his culture says he is more senior and does not have to act on upward feedback and a senior manager should know his subject more than his juniors – it could be that he just ( as a fully paid up member of the human race) does not like to listen!! Not all Americans are go getting sales people who can talk the leg of a mule – some are and others are quiet, considerate and thoughtful introverts.
So why the post? Well the way you consider a problem, the lens you view it through determines the clarity of what you see – so seeing culture, culture , culture as the problem means you will look for cultural solutions or cultural explanations for behavior. Now in some cases this might be right, but also the lens of personality type might be the right one, or the lens of skills and experience, or the lens of pressure and stress, or the lens of corporate norms etc etc. If we excuse behavior because it’s the cultural norm for a national group, then we are not helping the cause of developing better leaders.
If we can only see things from one perspective we can only apply a limited set of possible solutions. Leadership is not something that can be compressed into a nice easily labeled box. It is a multi faceted issue requiring some additional lenses to see it clearly.
I am all for training and workshops to expand the understanding of leadership, and the experience of those that we lead. What I think we need to do is ensure we do not become myopic and only see what we want to see.
Now is a busy time for people who work in organizational change. As the chaos of the markets settles down from shock to resigned action, there will be a need to assist organizations re energize and rebuild. Many organizations will react to the downturn with reduced headcount, or compressed organizational structures. In my experience, and I am sure that of many who work in change management, a new structure does not alway work very well however well planned on paper. It’s into this space that organizational change specialists step to assist the re energizing of the business – the process of getting the energy flowing again, in a positive and productive direction.
If you are a survivor of the corporate night of the long knifes then giving your all is not always the first concern. Keeping a low profile , head down and out of sight is many’s natural and understandable reaction. It’s always the tallest corn that gets cut first as the old adage goes. If this is the case how will our organizations innovate, thrive and really survive? You need peoples freely given effort to get an organization really buzzing and really competing – that will not come to be when people are anxious and afraid to contribute.
So what has this got to do with a career in change? Well history tells us that the situation we are in now is not new, the scale may be larger than we have experienced for a while but the situation is not in itself new. Change can be managed in a positive and engaging way – or an imposed and brutal way – there is a choice. What many organizations are lacking is people who see change as their role , their vocation, their territory. If we had more really committed change agents, change managers, change executives, change leaders then we would I am sure have more positive and well implemented change. We rarely accept amateur accountants or people who want to dabble in medicine, but change is an area of work we think we all know a bit about and so can have a bash at.
So why don’t you think about a career in change and become an expert in demand – as any really good practitioner is at the moment. It doesn’t stop you having another role within the organization, but being an expert in positive change management is never going to go out of fashion.
Today I am speaking at a conference on OD again. Having seen the slides of the speakers, including my own, i can see we have an unhealthy preoccupation with models. In describing what we do in OD and change we seem to have to resort to a 2×2 or 3×3 or spiral or pyramid or cube or sliding intersecting circles or some other often meaningless drawing. It’s not the drawing or the model I object to, as I am a user myself of diagrams, but the faith we place in them to show how change works.
Lets get some things clear, change is complex, and a model may not show all the elements of what is going on. What ever your favorite model happens to be, there are others out there that might also be of use. What you have will inevitably not cover all the bases in the game, all the time, in all the organizations you work in.
Models in engineering are examples to show what might be, models in architecture the same so why should we be so wedded to our conceptual models of what might be in change.
I think the model is the starting point, a place to deviate from, to build onto, to dissect, to deconstruct in the pursuit of understanding. My conclusion is that this takes a will to be wrong and a will to be open to new interpretations. If the outcomes are more models, more diverse but more appropriate to the specific change undertaken, then that for me at least is a good thing.
Third presentation attended and I have model and diagram fatigue – have I learn’t more about understanding of OD…. Jury is out on that one.
I am speaking again for the CIPD, the UK and probably Europe’s, most informed institute of HR, later this month. They are holding a conference on change and one of the streams is OD. I have been asked to do a piece on practitioners experiences. Particularly they wanted some tools and tips for OD people.
Why does every one want the silver bullet without thinking about the gun and the gunslinger? I do think models and tools are cool, I collect so many it’s crazy. However, as the old saying goes, a poor workman blames his tools. You, me , everybody should think of ourselves as tools for change and leadership and stop searching for the silver bullet, the stake through the heart of dictatorial leaders, or the holy grail of change. Truth is, there isn’t one – there are some great models, our’s for example, but they are only useful in the right hands, the right place and used the right way. That’s what we should be thinking about when we explore OD, less tools and more craftsmanship.
Many years ago I did an apprenticeship in Electrical Engineering, four years of study, practice and carrying older more experienced craftsman’s tools. It was not the prefect way to learn, but it was a blend of practice, theory and old hands passing on tips and experience. As HR managers and line managers getting involved in change implementations, seeking help from consultants or specialists in OD, maybe we should see if they have been through an apprenticeship somewhere…. at least in concept if not in reality.
Tools in the wrong hands can create havoc – a craftsman knows how to use them, when to use them and the best tool for the job. Consultants should be treated the same – check their previous work, find out about their tools and their pedigree as practitioners.
Here’s a secret, pass it on.. there is no ultimate model of change that works, just some tools in the right hands used in the right way.
Apologies to Supertramp for borrowing the title of their brilliant 1974 album, see how old I am ! You cannot escape the news and it’ s at least 40% about the economic, banking, credit, recession and mortgage crisis. If you think it’s all over and start to plan you life, bang, another broadside hits. So leadership in Crisis, what about it?
So reality is we’ve all been living on credit, low interest rates and rising house prices for too long – the grim reaper of fate has decided it’s time to pay the toll. There are few, if any, sectors that will not be affected by the downturn, globally and nationally. So what has this got to do with this blog and my thinking? Well we are talking here about the role of leaders in change and change is responsive as well as preplanned. Here is an unprecedented learning opportunity for leaders – as the trite saying goes. However in reality it’s a time when leaders need to show their courage, their confidence and their competence even more openly. When the going gets tough the tough get going or better put by Kipling 
IF you can keep your head when all about you Are losing theirs and blaming it on you
This really is the time for leaders to show some courage and take the initiative to share the why for their actions. Many business heads will be contemplating the need to restructure, reorganize and re size their operation. Take our advice and do this along with people and not in spite of them. Your employees will be worried about their livelihoods, their houses, their family, their pensions and their next pay cheque. Do not add to their worries by not informing them frankly and first about any plans to change the organization. These are the people who have served you well through the boom, so be honest and deal with them as adults in the bust times. As early as you know there are plans inform them – bad news, hope where there is some and just news about the organizations position.
Of course you will be held to some extent responsible, particularly is you display little in the way of pain yourself. However if the executives have taken a hit as well as the staff and you openly and honestly share with them the plans for the business though the tough times then you will gain their respect. This is an investment in morale, engagement and loyalty that you cannot do any other time. Employ adults, expect them to behave like adults and that means treating them as such, not being mis guided and over protective or at worst dismissive of their contribution.
Crisis management is good man management – people matter more than the balance sheet
time well spent
Today I have been talking to a European regional HQ of one of the worlds largest food companies. In talking to their Organizational Development people it seemed clear that their interest in leadership development and company re energizing was following a familiar path. A small group of senior team members set the overall direction for the business, aligned with the strong values of the company. They then turn these ideas into some statements of intent and priorities for the business. Job done – we now have a strategic direction and the business’s staff should fall into line to deliver.
Sound familiar? It does to me, it happens so many times. There is nothing wrong with the top team creating the lead, however what is wrong, in that in the current society we inhabit, is to expect people to go along with the plan without answering the why question. Why this plan, why not alternatives, why now, why not later in the year, why me, why not me, why in this way, why so aggressive a target, why not stay the same, why why why…… what we found endearing in children is seen as disloyal or skepticism in adults.
So what should we do instead? Construct with people a version of the answer, a way of understanding why so it doesn’t become a block to delivery. How is always the secondary question – how do we do this in a way that matches our integrity, values and competence…. but only when they know and commit to why. This is what we mean by envision and engage. Turning ideas into concrete commitments.
It take time to get real understanding , but discretionary effort is just that, free to give when people know why and not because they are consequenced to. I believe it’s time well spent, as the alternative is to waste time and effort in trying to deliver what is not understood.
I have had a number of personal experiences of being managed badly, but that’s not surprising in the long career I have survived ! What do I mean by being managed badly – well to me it’s being under used, rather than overworked.
I remember seeing a comment on my personnel file as I left a company after 20 years of varied service in a series of fantastic roles. It said ” mark has an unorthodox approach to authority and is one of the most difficult but talented people i have managed”. I can live with that as a company epitaph.
I have had bosses who want the ideas but don’t want to share the credit when they are implemented. For a short time this can be endured, but it always leads to dissatisfaction in the long term. I have had bosses who are not as smart as I am, and doing things that are plain wrong, but won’t or can’t hear alternatives. This is again a problem in the longer term, as you are working on things that are fundamentally wrong – and your advice has not been taken or heard.
As employees we need to be heard, not always agreed with but also not always dismissed as disloyal. What is the point in having staff and not using their collective or individual skills to get a good result.The positive deviants we rave about in the book are not going to be easy to manage, if they were they would not be so valuable to the organization.
Why the post on managing upwards? – well it seems there are a lot of people I meet in conferences that are in similar positions to myself in my early career. They want to do well, show initiative and challenge things in a positive way but their efforts are either hijacked or rebuffed. In some cases this can just be mildly annoying in others the trigger to leave the organization. So what can you do in a situation where the boss is not getting the best from you and maybe taking more than is fair?
Perception is reality – and reality is what you can get away with. This stolen quote is a fantastic summary of how I feel about being managed by others. I am arrogant enough to know when I am right and when I have a skill or experience that is useful to the organization. I am also humble enough to know I cannot change other people at will to be more like a boss I would admire. So I change the perception of the relationship – I manage them, in my mind, and they work for me. This change in perception, if you are smart, can change the whole working relationship. I play the game by my rules – getting the pet projects I want into the agenda of the boss, whether they credit me or not. In this way I know who is in control, and let’s face it if they had really good ideas we would probably support them, but in the absence of their own, let them have ours free. But also let’s not forget – they need us to help implement.
Also, use the experience to build your own CV and create a valuable proposition for others to seek your employment. People leave people – you don’t leave businesses – no one ever left MicroSoft or Nestle – they left poor bosses or people who didn’t manage the talent in front of them.
Managing the boss is a art – but one that anyone can learn. Be clear about the commitments you are going to deliver and extract a price for delivery that is meaningful and worthwhile to you. Search this blog or read the books section on commitments and you will realize the power of negotiation when you have all the ideas.
Remember – the person who knows how will always have a job. The person who knows why will always be his boss.
Now you know why being smart is a good thing and that not being able to manage you is the bosses problem not yours.
Recently speaking at a conference about the ideas in ReEnergizing the Corporation, I was told that the ideas were fine but did they only apply to large corporations? Well the simple truth is that good leadership is not the reserve of large organisations, multinational or older and wiser organisations – why should it be. The ideas we think are important may be gleaned from research and working with larger organisations, but they are sound and suitable for all leaders of people.
Ask yourself thsese questions:
Should talent only be allowed to thrive in large organisations?
Should leaders only explain Why when they have more than 100 employees?
Should I develop my staff when there are so few of them?
You don’t have to be a business genius to see how stupid the answers seem if you take a view that small businesses can’t apply these ideas. In fact in a smaller enterprise the results should come faster. Being close to you staff is easier and therefore the individual responses easier in a smaller organisation. So big or small, east or west, high or low tech – good leadership is good for business.
Just a short post to share some thoughts about perceptions and reality. How many times in our life’s have we read or seen on the TV stories about people and places and taken them literally, or as fact and not just some journalistic representation. Whether its the stories about Palin, Blair or Chavez we ( at least I am guilty) of taking them at face value. The same is true about places and cultures.
I have just spend four days in Colombia, speaking at the ACRIP HR conference. When I thought of Colombia and the invitation was confirmed, I immediately researched the country with particular reference to security and its history of narcotics. What I read was reassuring , in that things were getting better , at least the embassy website with its safety warnings was saying that it was now ok to travel – as long as you knew where you were staying, keep out of un booked taxis, don’t wear expensive wrist watches etc etc. Well let me put the record straight…
Colombians are some of the friendliest people I have ever met, very polite, fun, lively, intelligent and in many cases ( at least female gender) stunningly beautiful. The country ( at least the part I saw) is also safe, welcoming and almost stress free for a western European tourist. I have had more hassle in Rome and Paris than in Cartagena. The city itself is a Unesco world heritage site and deservedly so.
So sat in the lounge of the airline in Bogota, I have been thinking about the injustice we can do people and places by taking all the information we have just at face value. How many times have we done the same with people, and unintentionally dismissed a talent that has yet to show its worth. I have made mental note to myself – in future check reality before making a judgment. Trust people to have good intentions and in 99.99 % of cases you will be found to be true.
A second note to myself – don’t accept an invitation to a latin country unless you can salsa first !
How often have we heard the cliche ” we need to do some thinking outside of the box” when we are being “inspired” by our well meaning bosses – mistaking management jingoism for leadership.
In order to risk being creative we need two things, confidence in our position to be radical, innovative and challenging, and also some structure to deviate from – pure blue sky thinking is really just that, dreaming, nightmare stuff. Companies need to have some idea of the context of their industry first, the position they are in now – before they start to T.O.T.B Leaders don’t ignore where we are now – extolling only a vision, without reference to where we are now. Context is important – it shapes our starting point, it helps place us on the map in the first place, so we can navigate to somewhere else. In order to think outside the box we need two things – a box in the first place, and the space and confidence to think !!
Take a look at the evolution of thinking in business. Back in the 1920’s when management and business was becoming the subject of rigorous study the interface of man and machine was the focus. History has taught us that efficient management can reduce costs and has made operations in business lean and repeatable. We have Fredrick Winslow Taylor to thank for this in terms of ideas and Henry Ford, Arthur Sloan and McDonald’s to thank for the case studies in operational excellence. The essence of this approach to “scientific management “ is/was to take all the skill out of the operation and reduce the process to the simplest possible level of action. Result; people are treated like Oxen. At the time it was considered the epitome of business intelligence and lauded as progressive management. We now know better. The interface of man and man should be the real focus – leader and led.
The problem with repeatable processes, and anything that can be reduced to a documented process, is ultimately it’s also repeatable by someone else. Result: limited competitive advantage, short-term savings for short-term advantage – necessary but not sufficient. In business terms a good try but no
cigar for the winner.
We are now emerging into a new era where the demand on the organisation from talented knowledge workers is greater than at any other time in the history of mankind. Bright people, and let’s at least acknowledge that we are smart enough to hire bright people, ask better questions. They want to be engaged with their employer. There was a time when a job was a necessity. If you were good enough to employ people this was reason enough to gain their loyalty. Commitment was automatic. People were self-motivated. Fortunately, or unfortunately depending on where you stand, this does not compute now for the majority of knowledge workers or the corporate competents, as some would label them. For this group of talented individuals they want or more accurately demand a better deal. The psychological contract, that unspoken deal we all make with our employer, is getting more complex and more demanding to fulfil. Engaging them, really differentiating the employee value proposition to a level of the individual, is the way to get talent committed to your cause. 1-2-1 leadership is the case for Engagement.
It’s a global phenomenon not just a product of the west or the affluent northern hemisphere. Intelligent people need to know why and how they deliver their input to the greater organization. Whether you are from India, Indiana or Indonesia, talented employees want more than a just a pay packet. They want to be led, inspired to give their best and not just what you pay for. Discretionary effort is a worldwide untapped energy resource – there is no energy shortage, we are just looking in the wrong places.
Compliance is not enough to keep the best and brightest in your organisation. You need a compelling employment value proposition. Talented people have freedom of choice and you need to ensure for the best players in the game, that they chose to be on your team. Oxen you could beat into compliance, or at least reward with a suitable carrot. Taylorism was built on that simple principle. Times change, people change, expectations change, and management is no longer enough. What these demanding times require is exceptional leadership. 3E Leadership captures the essence of what times now demand of us.
