Showing posts with label Leadership & Management. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Leadership & Management. Show all posts

Sunday, 5 October 2014

Why driving change is hard work

How many times do you hear or read the term “driving change”? It’s a very assertive message, the intent to make it happen no matter what, but I wonder if the concept of driving is the root cause of many initiatives failing to deliver on expectations.

Driving, it seems, implies forcing others to go in a direction they don’t want to; little wonder then that, as soon as the driving force is removed, they revert back to what they feel happiest with. Driving change, then, is hard work and demands constant ongoing effort from the driver.


Sunday, 31 August 2014

The ABCDs of Trustworthy Leadership

The world is in desperate need for a new kind of leadership. The type of leadership we’ve seen the last several decades has produced record low levels of trust and engagement in the workforce, so clearly what we’ve been doing isn’t working. We need a leadership philosophy grounded in the knowledge and belief that the most successful leaders and organizations are those that place an emphasis on leading with trust.

Friday, 13 June 2014

The importance of Mission

I was once charged with turning round a business that was in financial difficulties, one of my first tasks was to understand what made its customers keep coming back. I discovered that over 30% of the added value our customers benefited from was our expertise, and we were giving it away; the customers were getting a free service. Furthermore, there were no processes or systems in place that enabled part of the service to be measured or charged for; the challenge was therefore made more difficult because, apart from plugging the operational gap, the customer had got used to the free service and saw no reason to suddenly start paying for it.

Monday, 28 April 2014

Leadership – to change or not to change, that is the question

Photo: GETTY IMAGES
So David Moyes has departed Manchester United - not an unexpected result given the clubs performance this season. I have to confess to being a lifelong supporter and so I am dismayed at the change in fortunes in only one season, therefore Moyes leaving is no surprise and with a reported £5m payoff every cloud has a silver lining! Failure can be rewarding after all. Who was it said, "Gentlemen, we need to fail more often."?

Of course, it raises some interesting points on the subject of leadership. A number of pundits have claimed one reason for his failure was he wanted the team to adapt to his style of leadership rather than the other way around. It seems that whenever a new “leader” arrives they seem to want to stamp their authority and character on the team/organisation/company. Same in politics, new governments want to change whatever the previous lot did irrespective of whether or not it is needed.

So what should a good leader do?

Friday, 6 December 2013

Rules for Assuring Poor Performance

Imagine I took over the management of a poorly performing organization and wanted to keep it that way. For example, I might not want it to grow so quickly that it would leave me less time to pursue my hobbies and golf. What steps would I take?

First, I would ensure that all of the managers and employees are totally ignorant of the executive team's strategy. That way no one will understand how the work they do each week or each month contributes to successfully achieving the strategy. Next, I would figure out ways to insure that managers and employees don't trust one another. I would discourage dissent and debate. It would be tricky to preserve some level of harmony by not allowing healthy conflict among managers that are already distrustful of each other, but I think I could do it.

I have recently heard about this new trend of “business analytics.” I will stop any employee trying to use software for analysis. My IT department should have some sort of software to detect it.

Next, I would avoid holding anyone accountable. That would be fairly easy because I would disallow reporting of performance measures. Anyone mentioning the phrase “the balanced scorecard” would be summarily fired. I would try to disallow setting of targets, but some managers have a nasty habit of liking them. I think those managers believe that if they could make it appear that they are better performers than others, that I would then reward them with a “pay for performance” bonus system. If I allow people to be motivated this way, performance might improve. I'm not going to fall for that trick.

I would freeze our managerial accounting system to remain in its archaic state. It was probably designed in the 1950s, but our external financial auditors would always be giving us an OK grade. I'd allow managers to hire more support overhead to manage the resulting complexity, but I'd preserve the primitive overhead cost allocations to processes, products and customers using those distorting and misleading broad averages, like product sales volume or number of units produced. Using activity-based costing (ABC) would be forbidden. Most employees would already know that these cost allocations cause big cost errors, but I would want to keep them guessing about which products and customers make or lose money and what it actually costs to perform our key business processes. I don't think my financial controller will correct this, but I need to keep a watchful eye because my accountants are getting much smarter about how to improve operations and serve as strategic advisors to me.

We would need to be careful about how much information we collect and report about our customers. Obviously we'd report their sales volume data, but I would not segment our customers into any groupings. I'd keep sales reporting at a lump sum level. I don't want anyone asking questions like, “Which types of customers should we retain, grow, acquire or win back from competitors?” To keep our company from tanking, I would encourage sales growth by putting big signs in the marketing department saying, “More sales at any cost!” I'd prevent the CFO from any thoughts of measuring customer profitability. But that would be easy because our arcane cost accounting system wouldn't be capable of calculating that information. The marketing people typically spend their budget with a “spray and pray” approach, anyway. Targeting specific types of customers and getting a high-yield payback from our marketing spend would be outside their level of thinking. I'd maintain our advertising spending as the “black hole” that no one understands.

I would, of course, implement an enterprise resource planning (ERP) system. I wouldn't want to be at a cocktail party with other executives and admit I don't have one. That would be too embarrassing, like a teenager without an iPod. Luckily, ERP systems alone won't improve performance; they produce mountains of transactional data for daily control but not meaningful information from which anyone could make wise judgments or good decisions.

Our budgeting system would be another way to assure our poor performance. Since the budget numbers are obsolete a couple of months after we begin the fiscal year, assembling the budget for six months during the prior year would provide a great distraction and prevent anyone from working on more important things. Plus I love sending the budget back down a few times to be redone to lower the budgeted costs. Everyone moans – more assurance for poor performance.

We'd squeeze our suppliers. We could talk about partnering and collaboration, but any attempt to actually do so would be squashed immediately. Never trust a supplier. If you drive one out of business, you can always find another.

I don't think I could stop employees from using spreadsheets. They are contagious. But since every department would have their own spreadsheets, it would be like a Tower of Babel. Employees would waste a lot of time trying to make their numbers match. Those employees with secret spreadsheets might want to use them for forecasting and planning. I'd put a stop to that by calling it gambling and promote our company as being conservative. Gambling is for fools, so I'd set a policy forbidding risk taking.

I know that operating a poorly performing business is an extremely difficult job, but I think I'd be up to the task. Suppressing the efforts of all those employees and managers who want to think, analyze, contribute and make the business successful requires constant vigilance. The business world is full of subversive ideas that could hamstring my efforts to keep the business floundering aimlessly.

I am particularly concerned about this new concept called “enterprise performance management.” Whatever it is, I will stop it from happening. I believe that with hard work and dedication, I could keep any company from reaching its profit-making potential.

Gary Cokins, CPIM (gcokins@garycokins.com; phone 919 720 2718) http://www.garycokins.com

Gary Cokins (Cornell University BS IE/OR, 1971; Northwestern University Kellogg MBA 1974) is an internationally recognized expert, speaker, and book author in business analytics and enterprise performance management systems. He is the founder of Analytics-Based Performance Management LLC, an advisory firm located www.garycokins.com . He began his career in industry with a Fortune 100 company in CFO and operations roles. He then worked 15 years in consulting with Deloitte, KPMG, EDS, and SAS.


Thursday, 8 August 2013

Ministers - 12 or 40?

This is a little story we used to tell when, in the early days of quality learning, we began to understand what to lead means.

The question was asked: which is the ideal number of team members we must have in our organization?

Which number would you say, without thinking much about it? Answers used to vary from 3 up to 20.

The correct answer, however, was:

IT DEPENDS!

If the team is well trained, completely aware of what they have to do, and the leader only does that which he alone can do... a conductor commands up to 180 musicians in a philharmonic orchestra!

Each of the musicians is thoroughly trained, has a sheet music that tells him in detail what has to be done... and the conductor only sets the rhythm!

Imagine if he tried to jump from one musician to the next, correcting the violinist's strings tension, replacing the drummer at some crucial point, or singing at such a high note as the soprano was not being able to reach...

In other words: the number varies, depending on the clarity of the instructions given, people’s training and... a leader who doesn't get in the way!

You can apply this reasoning to your company...

Written by: Claus Süffert