Tag Archives: management

21st Century Leadership Challenges

December 25, 2009 – 9:10 am

The leadership world is divided in to mutually suspicious tribes – theoreticians versus practitioners, PR hogging gurus versus part time academics, supporters of the old command and control versus inspirational team builders, and finally leaders and managers themselves.

The business of running a business has always fallen prey to business school fads and consultant fraudsters, who suffer from a severe case of status anxiety. The very idea promoted by these so called experts that leadership is about anything other than people is preposterous, and has proven to be one of the great fallacies in the business world since Peter Drucker was accused of being a fantasist. The concept of re-engineering processes introduced by “experts”, in my opinion, focuses too much attention on efficiency as a goal – driven by lean, six sigma, or TQM processes- and not enough on efficiency as a means, driven by people.

In “The concept of the corporation”, published in 1946, you are struck by how similar today’s methods are to those of yesteryear. This is partly because, as technology and production methods evolve over time, what remains the same is the people, leading us to conclude that Leadership and Management is not a progressive science as some might want us to believe.

The 21st century has already spawned a sizable volcano of daunting new challenges. Deregulation, digitization, ecosystems, strategy life cycles, and competition present but a few, being tackled by leaders and managers alike. What remains unsettled is how to deal with employee issues as they change over time. Specifically worrisome are : a) broadening the scope of employee freedom, by managing less, without sacrificing focus, discipline, and order, b) creating an organization where the spirit of shared values and community dominate, not programs and policies, and c) providing for a mission that justifies extraordinary contribution.

The profile of the new century employee has certainly evolved over the years, more so in the last ten than in the fifty years prior. Traditional organizations and Human Resources Management programs taught us to look for diligence, intellect, and obedience as characters of the best employees. Today, and certainly in the future, obedience, diligence, and expertise can be bought for next to nothing; for we are living in an era where knowledge has become commoditized. The point is this: If you are to survive and successfully deal with these challenges, you need employees who are more than acquiescent, attentive, and astute – they must also be passionate, ardent, and enthusiastic. This clear shift in employee traits presents a conundrum for future leaders and managers. They are paid to oversee, control, and administer. Yet, as we move forward, the most valuable human capabilities are precisely those that are the least manageable. Current efficiency management tools cannot make employees more creative, committed, or zealous.   

Leaders of traditional organizations are very good at aggregating effort and coordinating activities based on shared competencies or objectives. They are not however good at mobilizing effort or inspiring employees to go the next step. They must face the challenge of turning bureaucracies in to communities where the work is less contractual, and more as a means of making a difference, or exercising a special talent. Employees must feel less as a factor of production, and more as a partner in a cause. They must get away from the web of rules and policies and into common values and partnerships.

Based on how effective organizations are in dealing with the above two points, employees will choose, to either give or withhold initiative, creativity, and passion. They are gifts that are passed on to organizations not by exhortation or rah-rah pep talks, but by managers and leaders asking themselves what kind of purpose would merit the best of everyone in the organization. To produce sustainable market gains, the next great innovation, or lasting financial benefits, organizations need a moral imperative that can’t be manufactured by smooth talking CEOs or hired consultants. Moral imperative must be the result of a vision, shared values, and it must be an end, not a means.

I cannot help but think of a quote I had come across a couple of years ago while working with a CEO, self proclaimed visionary who failed at leading miserably at every aspect of leading. It is from the Analects of Confucius ” The Master said, govern the people by regulations, keep order among them by chastisements, and they will flee from you, and lose all self respect. Govern them with moral force, keep order among them by ritual, and they will keep their self-respect and come to you of their own accord”

By lotfi saibi | Posted in Business and Politics | Also tagged , , , , , , , | Comments (1)

AMBIDEXTROUS LEADERSHIP

October 23, 2009 – 6:20 am

Merriam-Webster defines ambidextrous as

1 : using both hands with equal ease
2 : unusually skillful : versatile
3 : characterized by duplicity : double-dealing

Let us compare a soccer player who is one-dimensional (either right or left footed) to one who is ambidextrous and can dribble with both feet. The latter leaves the defenders guessing as to what his next move is, or what direction he might be heading to next. The former is very predictable, and generally will lose possession of the ball very quickly. I was that player for many years, until I finally learned how to manage the ball with both feet.

I have to say that I have never driven a race car, but I can imagine an F1 driver trying to catch up with the pole leader, or one attempting to create some distance from his next follower. Such distances are not generally made up in straight-aways, but instead in turns, where you are most likely to outmaneuver the others. It is after all in tight corners where strategies and skill will shine, and where you separate the pretenders from the real winners. Tight, busy turns create opportunities for a driver to make up ground. similarly, a crisis is an opportunity for a leader of company to distinguish his company form the others. A good crisis should never go by the wayside.

What’s with the sports analogies, you might say…Think of a company CEO or division manager who can only focus on the task at hand. That is the equivalence of the one-dimensional soccer player, or the race car driver who can only pass on the straight- aways. They rarely accomplish their objectives. Instead, what is needed is a leader who can think beyond the goal at hand. Strategies have a shelf life that is determined by either a product life cycle, pricing, or competition ( supplanted by a more effective strategy). A leader who fails to recognize the difference between flexibility and firmness, cohesiveness and autonomy, and alignment and adaptability will fail in his or her duties to lead. This is the one-dimensional soccer player.

It is this juggling act that I refer to as ambidextrous leadership- the ability to manage effectively today, while planning and rehearsing the future. As my soccer carrer was short, so will yours as a one-dimensional leader.

In sports, as in the corporate world we live in, what makes good coaches great is the belief that special situations will arise in every game. And unless you anticipate these special cases and prepare for them, you will leave yourself unprepared and unable to take advantage of them, or worse, recognize them as they come about. Practicing the future is an essential duty of every leader. Run your company today as today’s customer requires, with an eye on the future. Ask Steve Jobs the CEO of Apple or any of the departed big three auto makers CEOs what they think of this. Play out the various scenarios and develop contingency plans accordingly. As anyone who has spent any time in the military will tell you – Generals who do not play war games and adopt to future technologies, will be sitting ducks when real bullets start flying.

An ambidextrous leader is the equivalent of a coach who will enter a game with more than one strategy at hand. For example, he can devise a game that features more offense than defense. Or, he can set up plays that anticipate the opposition tactics and attack their weaknesses. A company president who ventures in to new territories anticipating all kinds of obstacles ( market, culture, prices, competition, etc…) and different strategies to match (well prepared and rehearsed, for each scenario that might appear unexpectedly), will undoubtedly succeed. On a personal note, after my first visit to the MENA region and several meetings with potential customers, I realized that some of what I had learnt in the “streets” in North America, and in the class room at Harvard was of little use to me. Instead, I hurriedly, sought to devise different scenarios to accomplish my goals and overcome the many obstacles I met. Our company is more nimble today, and is in a more advantageous position to anticipate the markets and the customers’ needs. We can certainly help shape the future of our industry, instead of reacting to exogenous market conditions dictated by other factors or players.

Out of the ability to “juggle” with both feet, or hands in the case of some of my American born friends:), is born adaptability to current and future economic and market conditions.

In his new book Outrunning Change, Gary Hamel defines an adaptable company as “… one that captures more than its fair share of new opportunities”. I think of it more as, an organization that is constantly seeking new horizons. One that is always redefining its core business in ways that identifies new markets. Our company has recently ventured in to new territories in the MENA and South East Asia regions seeking such opportunities. To do this successfully, we needed leadership and management that recognize this essential need, brought about by market contraction and evaporating liquidity; forcing organizations to adjust to new price equilibriums- famous in microeconomic theories of perfect competition and zero profits.

By lotfi saibi | Posted in Business and Politics | Also tagged , , , , , | Comments (2)

What kind of intelligence does a leader need to succeed?

September 22, 2009 – 1:22 am

Back in 1995 I read a book called Emotional Intelligence (Bantam), by Daniel Goleman. I have to admit that I really did not understand a heck of a lot of what he was talking about. You see, Emotional Intelligence was a new phenomenon. I had never really heard of it as a studied discipline. I was very familiar with IQ, high levels of technical knowledge, and the various descriptions associated with great leaders. Emotional Intelligence, No way I said. This past week, while finishing a project at Harvard for one of my management classes, i had come across the same book again.I will shamefully admit that i could not put it down.  

Goleman found that while the qualities traditionally associated with leadership-such as intelligence, toughness, determination, and vision-are required for success, they are insufficient.  This made me think of how Emotional Intelligence (let’s call it EI for short) operates and its relationship with effective performance. Happily, as I read the book once more, I realized we had covered several of those answers in the prior posts of this blog.  Tangible, quantifiable criteria, such as profitability, employee turnover, assessments, were used to differentiate the star performers at senior levels within their organizations from the average ones. Interviews and tests were conducted, and capabilities were compared. The results were as suspected. Intellect was a driver of outstanding performance. The top performers also possessed cognitive skills such as big picture thinking and long term vision. Equally satisfying to me, it was also concluded that, differences in technical skills among leaders, were of negligible importance.

As such, we will now continue with our series regarding the characterisitcs of great leaders, how to identify them, and work with them. This is called managing from all levels- The Stratosphere or the water cooler.

At 30,000 feet, you can see the total picture of your business, your industry, and maybe even the economy. You can detect interesting patterns that might create opportunities for your business — imperative to stay ahead of the game.

But if your thinking is always in the stratosphere, you might miss important details. You also have to be incisive, drilling to the specifics.

Otherwise your bold goals might be completely unrealistic; you won’t be able to pinpoint the priorities for your group, and you won’t know if your grand plans are being executed.

Also, those details have to be the right ones. Of all the observations you make, all the numbers your business generates, and all the sources of information available to you, you have to make a judgment about which ones really matter.

Patterns of Thinking

In business, how you think is just as important as what you think.

The ability to think at multiple altitudes, from 30,000 feet to 50 feet, is a distinct advantage in exercising your leadership know-how. But there are at least two other ways of thinking that are equally potent.

• Reframing

Reframing is being able to change your vantage point, to look at a phenomenon or problem from a very different perspective. It’s how leaders redefine their market and create new growth trajectories – MS going from competing in OS to competing in SEO.

You can use reframing to get team members to focus on a common goal rather than on their individual interests.

I once worked for a CEO of a hospitality holding company. He wanted to dig into the details of the business, so he went to work as a street cleaner. At that level, he noticed something he didn’t like: The hard-working janitorial staff viewed customers as the enemy who stood in the way of their mission to keep the parks and parking lots clean.

So he reframed their mission from cleanliness and safety to “giving customers the greatest day of their life.” Seeing their roles in a different light gave the staff a more positive attitude toward customers and paved the way for a better customer experience.

• Connecting the dots

Linear, analytic thinking is useful and important, but sometimes you have to take mental leaps in order to make sense of incomplete or seemingly unrelated pieces of information. You have to go beyond the charts and graphs and use imagination to connect the dots.

This mental process can be unconscious. If you ponder a problem for days and suddenly wake up one morning with a clear answer, your unconscious mind has done the work of connecting the dots. It appears to be intuitive.

Think how important connecting the dots is in a business meeting. As the dialogue flows among people, you as the leader should try to make connections between the ideas as they spontaneously arise. The better you get at this, the more productive the discussion will be as you synthesize the ideas rather than choosing among them

Anyone competing in the media or software development industry — or any fast-changing industry, for that matter — has to be able to make connections even as the dots themselves change.

By lotfi saibi | Posted in Business and Politics | Also tagged , , , , , , , | Comments (1)