From Manager to Leader
There is a lot of confusion about the differences between management and leadership. They both involve deciding what needs to be done, creating a network of people to accomplish goals and ensuring that the work actually gets done. Management and leadership complement each other but they do so in a very different way.
So what is the difference?
John P. Kotter differentiates management from leadership in his book What Leaders Really Do. He claims that management copes with complexity but leadership copes with rapid change. Kotter has discovered 3 major differences between the management and leadership:
- Management involves setting goals, planning, budgeting and allocating resources. Leadership involves setting direction and developing a vision of the future along with strategies to achieve this vision.
- Management involves organizing, staffing, setting-up job descriptions, recruiting qualified individuals, delegating responsibilities and devising systems to monitor execution. Leadership involves aligning people, communicating the vision and getting a commitment to achieve it.
- Management provides control, solves problems, monitors results versus objectives and takes corrective actions to resolve deviations. Leadership provides motivation and inspiration. It keeps people moving in the right direction despite challenges by appealing to their values and emotions.
Most organizations are over-managed and under-led because they focus mainly on formal long-term planning and budgeting rather than on setting direction. Long-term planning is a deductive process, while setting direction is an inductive process. Long term planning worked well in the 20th Century when the markets did not change rapidly. In the 21st Century markets are characterized by rapid change and we must adapt to volatile market dynamics. Therefore rapid change is essential to be able to compete in the new dynamic business environment.
But here is the problem…
Managers try forcing change through formal organizational systems, structures and incentives. They fail to drive change because they don’t involve informal stakeholders (like customers or suppliers). Managers communicate short-term plans effectively through the formal organization but when it comes to communicating a whole new future – we need a leader.
Communicating a new vision successfully depends solely on leadership – not management. Leaders tend to go beyond the mechanical structure of the organization. While managers count on the power of their titles, leaders count on rapport, integrity and trustworthiness to drive change.
Well managed organizations are not necessarily well led organizations. The employees of well managed organizations are effective within the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs). The same employees are powerless when they try to initiate change outside the SOPs. When they attempt to initiate change, they receive responses like “That’s against our policy”, “We cannot afford it”, and “Shut-up and do as you are told”.
Strong leaders resolve these challenges by providing a strong alignment and drive change beyond SOPS. While managers focus on “best practices”, leaders create “new practices”. While managers adapt to the culture, leaders create a new culture. Leaders align employees with the new direction and ensure that they are not reprimanded, even when they do not comply with the policy.
For example, managing a factory requires an effective control system to respond immediately to deviations from the plan. This factory requires well organized, trained and disciplined employees to run the plant efficiently. But achieving a bold vision requires the kind of energy that only motivated, empowered and inspired employees can achieve. Control systems will not drive employees toward a new direction. Leaders, not managers, will evoke feelings of achievement, a sense of belonging, recognition, self-esteem, and a valuable purpose. Such feelings will prompt powerful responses.
Leaders rather than managers will motivate their people by articulating the business vision, involve people in how to achieve the vision, provide coaching, empower and enhance self-esteem and reward success. This not only gives people a sense of accomplishment but also makes them feel like they are part of the company. They feel that the organization really cares about them. The more change characterizes the business, the more the business needs leadership over management.
While managers tend to develop depth of expertise in their professional discipline, leaders must develop width of experience beyond their professional disciplines. These leaders are finance professionals that assume operational responsibilities or operational managers that assume sales positions. Creating multidisciplinary task-forces or small business units are great ways to develop new leaders.
Promotion to a management position is a milestone in our career. There is no promotion to leadership. Becoming a leader is a personal decision and a milestone of personal development rather than career development. The leadership milestone requires focus on 3 areas: First, set vision and direction toward change. Second, align people by communicating through an informal network of relationships. Third, motivate and inspire people to “buy-in” to the vision by evoking feelings, emotions and inner values.
Consensus of Commitment
“What?”
Michael’s face turned red as a tomato when he gasped “What do you mean ‘recall the product’?”
“The FDA instructed us to stop selling the supplement because it has to get FDA approval” Marissa replied squeezing in her chair.
“How come?” Michael banged on the desk. “We decided to launch it in Asia first. Why did you launch it in US?”
“No Michael” Marissa replied unconvincingly. “You were in the meeting when we decided to take a risk and launch it in the US”.
“Are you kidding?” Michael voice increased. “I wouldn’t even think about making such a ridiculous mistake.”
Marissa, the Chief Marketing Officer, decided she was better off recruiting some help from her colleagues.
“Check it with the rest of the team before jumping to conclusions.” Marissa replied, thinking that finger pointing wouldn’t change the facts. They screwed up. She decided to focus on rectifying the mistake first and pacify her CEO later.
3 hours later the executives gathered in the boardroom. The product had been removed from the website but the boardroom was still as tense as ever.
“We had 3 serious failures this year” Michael started.
“Michael, we don’t have clarity about decisions that we make.” said Joan, the COO. “We leave meetings with different ideas of what decisions were made. There is no clarity of what we should focus on most. This product launch went under the radar of all of us because it was not coordinated well.”
Silence filled the room. Michael frowned while he thinking how to answer.
Have you also left meetings “thinking” that you know what had been decided only to find later that you were wrong?
It happens often to all of us, but there is a way to avoid this.
Define a Thematic Goal
We have long term strategic goals and we have short term objectives. A Thematic Goal bridges between the short-term objectives and the long-term goals.
I love Patrick Lencioni’s definition for a Thematic Goal as “A single, qualitative focus or rallying cry that is shared by the entire leadership team and ultimately, by the entire organization-and that applies for only a specified period of time.” The Thematic Goal is the top priority of the entire leadership team for a given period of time. It aligns employees throughout the organization and is a tool for resetting direction when things get out of sync.
Thematic Goals are powerful because of the process of setting them. The leadership team members provide their suggestions, argue on the priorities and decide on the single most important goal that will be shared collectively. It requires every member to commit to the same goal and assume collective accountability to achieve it.
Is it possible to reach consensus before making crucial decisions? What if one or two members do not agree?
Well, depends if they share their disagreements or keep quiet. Working in Asia for the last 12 years taught me to “mine” for disagreements. Too many times projects fail because leaders wrongly assume that their teams are on board. Every time we make a decision, we should ask each person one by one for agreement and commitment. If even one person disagrees, then their concerns must be heard thoroughly. The dissenters must feel that they have been heard well and their concerns have been considered.
Consensus of Commitment
When we listen and consider carefully every disagreement and, given enough time to discuss, argue and convince, we can achieve Consensus of Commitment even though we have not achieved Consensus of Agreement through a process which is known in Intel’s culture as “disagree and commit”.
Disagree and commit is very powerful. It is a validation of a different opinion, a commitment to moving forward, and most importantly, gets things done. Plans are implemented. Strategy is executed.
Communication of Decisions
Unfortunately leadership teams that successfully commit to Thematic Goals still fail to execute because of one common mistake. They fail to communicate the decisions across the organization – upward, downward and sideways.
We usually focus on cascading decisions to our team members but most times ignore other stake holders like board members.
Peer to Peer Accountability
Once we commit to a Thematic Goal, it is the responsibility of everyone to call upon any of their peers who don’t meet their commitments. Most people don’t confront their peers when they fail to meet their commitments. They think it’s their peer’s boss’ job to call upon their peer commitments.
It’s not.
Peer to peer accountability is very powerful when it becomes organizational culture. People start taking their commitments seriously when they are called upon by their friends. They try much harder when they feel that they risk relationships by disappointing their colleagues.
Reaching clarity in decision making is not difficult. Just follow the process. Define a Thematic Goal. Listen, consider and discuss objections openly. Reach consensus of commitment by asking dissenters to “disagree but commit”. Cascade the decision across all levels of the organization.
Are You a Whole Brain Leader?
Jeffery, the COO of a Fortune 500 internet service provider (ISP), started to lose patience. Well, he has never been famous for his patience. He has been struggling for the last hour to persuade the executive team to penetrate into the Japanese market through acquisition of a Japanese ISP.
The presentation, as usual, was perfectly manicured with lots of sales forecasts, market share data and return on investment tables. He had worked on the presentation for almost a month. He looked at his watch nervously realizing that his time was up and it was just one week before the next Board meeting.
Jeffery was dreaming about press conferences followed by interviews to Forbes, Financial Times, Bloomberg, CNBC and CNN. He craves some glory after the blood, sweat and tears of the last 3 years with the company.
But his colleagues did not know all of this. They seemed indifferent to his ambitions and completely disinterested. They challenged the risks, the figures, the timing…everything. Jeffery had been so confident that nobody would disagree with this opportunity. He spent a lot of time imagining his success. He did not spend too much time on how to handle objections.
Julie, the CEO, asked quickly for feedback and with everyone in complete agreement of not pursuing any negotiations further with the Japanese company, the meeting came to an end.
“What went wrong?” Jeffery asked himself. He had covered every possible aspect of the acquisition. His presentation was packed with hundreds of supporting figures.
What really did go wrong?
Jeffery, like many executives, failed to win the hearts and the minds of his team. Most of us naturally approach business presentations, public speeches, employee communications or sale pitches from the left side of our brains. We provide the facts, information, data logically and we expect decisions, resolutions and actions based on logic.
This makes perfect sense. Doesn’t it?
The bad news is that logic is not always effective unless we engage both the logical, analytical and objective left brain of decision makers with their emotional, creative, subjective and intuitive right brains.
Many of us are products of traditional education systems that rarely emphasize emotional engagement. We have learned to develop analytical processes to reach logical conclusions. Unfortunately opinions are formed and decisions might be taken based on emotions rather than logic.
Our goal every time we engage an audience – colleagues, management, customers, board, or the public – is to engage the whole brain: left side and right side.
When we engage only the right side, nobody takes us seriously. Our communications will be no more than entertaining. Decisions are rarely taken based on the right brain alone.
When we engage only the left side, people do not develop any feelings toward the subject and do not feel the urge to take action.
We can improve dramatically our chances of achieving results, resolutions, decisions and buy-ins from any audience by becoming whole brain leaders who engage the left and right brain in every single communication.
How do we do this?
Becoming a whole brain leader is not as complicated as it sounds. We just have to start every presentation with a story with a message that sparks emotions with listeners. We can build a metaphor, analogy, allegory, or any personal story with a strong message that connects the topic to the presentation.
We start with the right brain first and then, and only then, when everyone already engaged emotionally with the message, we switch to the left brain and spit-out information, data, and analysis.
Finishing the informative part of the communication, we go back to the right brain and complete the story we started and we engage again emotionally to drive people to take action.
Every presentation is like a sandwich. The filling is the information between two slices of emotional engagements.
Poor Jeffery, if he started his presentation by sharing the same dreams he had about the glory the team should expect; if he painted the same vision of growth and how the results of the acquisition would affect personally each one of the participants; most likely he would have ended with a positive decision.
Still have doubts?
Try next time you are presenting information. Serve it as a sandwich of two rich emotional anecdotes with the information tightly packed within instead of providing only the filling spilled all over the place.
You will get more results and you will enjoy the process as well. If you are working on any presentation, start thinking about your emotional story and win the minds and hearts of your audience.
Influence – The No. 1 Success Factor
Convincing our top management, our colleagues and their teams to follow us requires one crucial skill – influence.
Martin Orlov, the new CIO of a Fortune 500 retail company, was in a very tough situation. The company spent 10% of the overall expenditures year after year on the company’s legacy IT system. The company’s new ambition to expand the business into online retail would even double the budget. The IT team believed in the legacy system they have developed for more than 15 years. They did not attempt to replace it with a new platform.
Martin was confident that the legacy system could not be transformed into an ecommerce platform with mobile capabilities, social integration and global localized versions. During his first month he formed a committee comprised of the company’s senior management and business unit managers to propose a plan for the required ecommerce expansion while decreasing the technology expenditures.
Martin knew that the only way to reduce costs while enabling a new ecommerce technology was to eliminate the legacy system and move all the various platforms to an integrated one. The problem was that this proposal would increase the short term capital investment, but pretty quickly the company would see additional revenue from online sales and long term the company would see a drop in operational expenses.
Martin knew that he would step on the toes of many executives that would be affected. Most of them treated the legacy platform like it was their baby. He neither had the power to force any of them to accept his plan nor did he have rapport with the business unit managers. He did not know them well enough and they did not know him either.
Martin was not a person who would be discouraged by a challenge. He knew the problem before he joined the company but was determined to make a difference.
Martin started meeting all the systems programmers and analysts. He shared his ideas, found points of resentment and provided solutions to objections. When he reached agreement he asked for a sign-offs on the proposal. When he faced resentments he moved the people who objected to the bottom of the list and decided to address them later on when he would be ready with more supporters.
The process was exhausting and time consuming but Martin was persistent to receive full support through one-on-one meetings. He avoided “herd” meetings where some people follow other people because of politics or reporting lines. Martin scheduled second and third meetings with people that had objections and showed them the wide support he had received on the signed-off document using the power of social acceptance to support the plan.
Martin expected to complete this process in one month but it took him 2 months even before presenting it to the committee. The committee members were surprised when the presentation was done by the Vice President of Technology who was previously the most vocal supporter of the legacy platform.
The plan was approved on the first committee meeting because Martin addressed all objections and made sure that all resentments would be brought to the table, discussed and documented.
After this success most of us would probably take it immediately to the Executive Committee or even to the Board. Right?
Not Martin.
Martin repeated the same process with higher management. He met them one-on-one, explained the plan, showed the signed-off documents and add more supporters at the top management. He left objections to be addressed again in second and third rounds of personal meetings. This process was shorter because the top management did not deal with the technical details and focused on the business impact and the cost.
Martin customized every presentation to the specific needs of the people he met. He ended up with more than 10 presentation versions but those versions were varied to address the specific goals of stake holders from their point of view.
The Executive Committee who included all C-Level executives and some board members resolved to implement the plan and bring it for a Board approval.
After this success most of us would probably take it immediately to the Board. Right?
Not Martin.
Martin met every Board member one-by-one and eventually ended up meeting some of their advisors to ensure that they were not influenced by informal stake holders. Powerful advisors, even though are not part of the Board or the executive team, still have a strong circle of influence.
Martin even asked for the Chairman’s support before the Board meeting. The Chairman was very influential with the public directors. Martin has seen too many times supportive directors change their mind without shame on the spot and reverse their support just to follow their political cycle of influence. There was too much on stake to let it happen this time. Martin wanted to avoid surprises because failure meant the end of his short tenure with the company.
Two more weeks of personal meetings and calls with the Board of Directors resulted in full support. The Board resolved to eliminate the legacy system and invest $3 million in an integrated ecommerce platform which ultimately would have lower operational cost. Within 3 months since Martin had joined the company, he achieved what looked impossible.
Influential Competence is the single most important skill that will take us to the top. It is the ability to influence peers and top management to undertake crucial decisions.
Martin’s tough situation is a common one for new and experienced leaders. Most decisions are taken collaboratively by committees, boards and teams. The informal decision making process is more powerful than the formal decision making process.
How can we develop influential competence? To answer this question, let’s look again at the methods Martin used to convince his peers to take on tough and potentially divisive challenges and solve them through consensus.
Informal power
Identify all stake holders and make sure that they support the plans. It is surprising how many informal circles of influence exist within an organization. Some call it politics and decide to rise above the game. Ignoring the game guarantees failure. The informal stake holders are in most organizations more powerful than the formal decision makers.
One –On-One
Large meetings should be to seal decisions, not reach them. Meetings are proven to be the toughest platform to make decisions on controversial issues, innovative strategies, disruptive technologies or turning points. We are never sure of the various support groups that have been formed over years. The most time consuming but most effective way to dissolve objections or controversy is the one-on-one meeting. In this way we customize our presentation to the point of view of our audience. Rushing to bring a decision to the group is exciting but not an effective process.
Personal Agendas
Check-out our personal agenda at the door but check-in the personal agenda of the person we want to influence. Everyone has a personal agenda. Revealing personal agendas benefits the persuasion process. Personal agendas are not necessarily negative. They are directions that people and their teams have already engaged with or committed to. Personal agendas might also be out of the scope of the business as well. Whether personal agendas are legitimate or not, the more we reveal the better we can handle objections. This process requires trust and good relationships to remove barriers of sharing personal information. Understanding what drives people and show them “what there is for them” is still a powerful influential interaction.
Influential Competence is not something we were born with. It can be developed by following the process of identifying the informal and informal stake holders from all corporate hierarchies and outside the corporation, meet them one-on-one as many times as needed to handle objections and address stake holders’ personal agendas without pushing our personal agendas.
The 2.5% Secret
“Do you know Vilfredo?” I asked Maria while the wine was poured into our glasses.
“No. Who is Vilferdo?
“Vilfredo Pareto” I smiled. “He was a revolutionary economist who’s seminal work, Cours d’Economie Politique, introduced a “law” of income distribution,later known as Pareto’s Law.”
“Sure I know. Pareto’s Law demonstrates that 80% of the wealth in society is produced by 20% of the population.”
It was too late to stop Maria as she continued “Pareto showed that this 80/20 ratio could be found almost anywhere, not just in economics. For example, 80% of harvested grain were produced by 20% of the planted seeds.”
“He was wrong” I laughed. “In our new economy the 80/20 ratio is much more disproportionate.
For example, French, English and Spanish languages have about 100,000 words but 2,500 are high frequency words that if we command them we comprehend 95% of most conversations. This can be achieved in 5 months but if we want to comprehend 98% of the vocabulary we probably need 5 years.
If 2.5% of the total subject matter provide 95% of the desired results, then the same 2.5% provides 3% less benefit than putting in 12 times as much effort.”
“This is amazing” said Maria. “The question is into what 2.5% should we invest our efforts?”
“Exactly” I continued. “This is our toughest challenge. Philosopher Nassim N. Taleb noted a major difference between language and business. Language is largely known but business is largely unknown. Therefore, in business 2.5% is not 2.5% of a finite knowledge but the 2.5% of what we know at the present time.”
Maria got excited. “I know what 2.5% will yield my best results”.
“So why don’t you focus on them?”
“Because they are the least urgent and they require deep concentration, laser-beam focus and thoughtful introspection. The 2.5% lose the battle to the 97.5% fire-fighting” Maria said gloomily.
“Most people don’t know what 2.5% will make a difference.” I said. “I use a ‘time-block’ system that ensures I spend enough time and give undivided attention to discover the 2.5% most important things that will yield results and focus on doing those things.”
What is the first thing you do every morning…beside brushing your teeth?” I asked.
“Check my emails…of course” Maria shot back without hesitation.
“Maria, once you start your day reading emails you lose any chance to deal with the 2.5%. You are taken over by other people’s agendas. You immediately start reacting to events. Sooner or later, emails suck your morning’s precious time.
Start your day with the 2.5% that matter. Discover what is the single most important thing that will make a difference today and just do it. Our success factors require focus, concentration and undivided attention. The 2.5% are too comprehensive to deal with while distracted by incoming emails, phone calls, meetings and other interruptions.
Supervisory managers need no more than one hour of undivided attention, focus and concentration on their long term 2.5% ‘make a difference’ goals. Middle-management needs up to 2 hours and top management up to 3 hours without interruption to think, strategize, develop and innovate. The rest of the day can be left for other matters.
The 2.5% are never reactive and always proactive.
How to choose the 2.5%?
Reflect on your past mistakes and your visions for the future. Then, ask for feedback about those reflections from your team. If your team doesn’t laugh at your goals…they are not big enough.
How to work on the 2.5%?
Time Blocks.
How do I do it? The first 3 hours of my day (after exercise and personal care rituals) are dedicated to business growth (strategic projects), professional growth (skills-set development) and personal growth (self-improvement).
The first hour follows Vijay Eswaran’s Sphere of Silence which covers reflection on mistakes, long-term strategic goals, short term objectives, daily tasks, personal growth and spiritual growth.
The next 2 hours are dedicated to working attentively, uninterrupted, and relentlessly on the 2.5% that matter.
Most of the executives tell me they don’t have time for this. It will disturb ‘getting thing done’.
They are right. They are very busy with getting things done. Some do it very efficiently but they work on the 97.5% which are not necessarily the most critical to achieve success.
The trick is to give 100% intentional focus and undivided attention to discover the 2.5% that matters and to incorporate dedicated ‘time blocks’ into your busy schedule to get the 2.5% done first.”
I smiled seeing Maria writing notes on the paper napkin. She has been always a lifelong learner.
Effectiveness vs. Efficiency
Maria Hernandez was the best marketing talent I ever worked with. She graduated in psychology but she fell in love with marketing during a summer internship working for an advertising firm and then went back to school for a MBA. Born to a middle-class Hispanic family in Colorado, she was very proud of her Mexican heritage and had hard time accepting an offer to relocate to South-East Asia leaving her loving family behind. We worked together in Singapore for a few years and we continued to be in-touch after our paths separated. Maria eventually moved to the UAE to work for a Marketing firm in Media City.
Naturally I wanted to meet with Maria on a trip to Dubai, and I couldn’t think of a better place than the Maya Mexican restaurant, right on Jumeirah beach.
I tried to dress smarter than casual because Maria tended to overdress for any event. Her mantra has been to keep her uniqueness all the time. She kept to her promise and when she picked me up from my hotel she was ready to go to a Royal Gala rather than an outdoor Mexican feast. Tall, good-looking, dark hair with a strong square featured face, Maria was an expressive, extroverted, warm woman with natural curiosity about people.
It was only an hour later over generous portions of tacos and margaritas that I found that Maria felt that the transition from a professional position to management was not as smooth as she expected. She struggled with delegation and editing her team’s write-up consumed most of her time. She felt that her team dragged her down rather she lifting the team up.
Maria loved marketing but not marketing management. Beyond looking after her clients, which she did very well, she now had responsibilities to her firm and her team, and she has not met the expectations of her employer, her team and even her own self.
Many executives taking the first steps from professional roles into management don’t spend enough time discerning the changes required to achieve their new goals. Maria is not an exception. She is so busy running after daily tasks than her calendar can contain, exhausting herself and working very late hours. Being what her friends perceived as workaholic hasn’t changed anything. Maria’s first conclusion was that the problem was “time management”. She read the books The Time Trap: The Classic Book on Time Management, by Alec Mackenzie and The Personal Efficiency Program: How to Get Organized to Do More Work in Less Time by Kerry Gleeson. She took actions upon the books and eventually improved her efficiency managing efficiently her outstanding tasks, replying efficiently to more emails and editing more campaigns and advertorials.
After a short time of believing she had solved the problem, Maria found herself frustrated again. Her impact on the business had not changed one bit. She didn’t progress towards new strategic goals and her team started to lose faith in her leadership abilities.
Maria had a rude awakening.
Improving efficiency does not improve effectiveness.
Definitions of efficiency and effectiveness vary. My favorite are:
- Efficiency means performing in the best possible manner with the least resources (i.e. time and effort).
- Effectiveness means accomplishing a purpose by producing an intended result.
Being effective is about doing the right things, while being efficient is about doing the things in the right way. Efficiency focuses on the process (means) whereas effectiveness focuses on achieving the (end) goal.
But here is the problem. It is much easier to improve efficiency than effectiveness because efficiency is concerned with the present while effectiveness is related to the future.
Most times being efficient requires inflexibility and following processes rigorously, and thus discourages innovation. On the other hand, being effective requires keeping the long term strategy in mind and adapting to changes quickly, thus encouraging innovation as it means thinking differently to meet a desired goal.
A big step toward leadership is putting effectiveness at a higher priority than efficiency. But this won’t be enough unless we are very clear about our purpose and align our plans and actions cohesively toward a congruent direction. Then, and only then, will we impact our business and careers.
The higher we scale the corporate pinnacle, the more effective we are required to become.
The opposite is also true.
The more effective we become the higher we scale the corporate pinnacle.
So how do we become more effective?
- Define our life purpose and values.
- Set long-term goals that are aligned to our life purpose.
- Integrate our goals with our career and business.
As long as we are not crystal clear about the “right” – the long term goals – we will still be swimming in the muddy swamp of efficiency trying to chase the holy grail of effectiveness.
My thoughts returned to the dining table where Maria was enjoying the Enchiladas. I shared with Maria my thoughts about effectiveness vs. efficiency and her eyes lightened.
“This is the missing part of the puzzle” Maria said. “Would you believe that strategic plans that can make a difference in my life, career and business, are on my list for the last 18 months?”
Her eyes watered. “Every single day my most important goals and projects, the things I want to do more than anything else, are pushed aside by firefighting, urgent tasks and micro-management”.
“What should I do?”
Maria’s question hanged in the air for a long moment.
“Focus on effectiveness, set making long- term impact the top priority. Everything else will follow” I replied.
“How?” Maria asked.
“It’s a long answer”. I smiled. “Let’s order another glass of wine”.
Digital Effectiveness
I was excited to meet George after 5 years. We worked together in Hong Kong and he since moved to the Middle-East. I was waiting for him at the rooftop of the recently opened Marina Bay Sands resort in Singapore when I saw his tall, tanned and confident figure looking for me at the entrance.
It took us a while to catch up with happenings of family, friends and colleagues and to enjoy the view of Singapore Marina Bay at dusk, over a superb glass of wine…
Bzzzzzzzzz…
George’s cellphone rang louder than an ambulance siren. He compulsively picked it up, glanced for a short moment, typed quickly and placed it on the table.
We had a few minutes of conversation about the impact of social media on future marketing when…
Bzzzzzzzzz…
George was faster than a cheetah hunting its prey. He did not notice the annoyed looks from the surrounding couples who were trying to have a romantic dinner.
Over the next 30 minutes George received, read and responded to more messages than my wine sips. He was not the same guy I knew 10 years ago prior to the era of BlackBerries, iPhones, Tablets, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, multiple email accounts and several mobile devices. This George was disturbed, unfocused and stressed. He did not complete a full anecdote without…
Bzzzzzzzzz…
“Do you have a lot of emergencies in your business, George?” I asked gently even though I was losing patience.
“Well, you know, the expectations are to respond to every communication at light speed. If I wait, other people will respond and take action before I am even aware. I also receive alerts from my blog, LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and my personal email accounts. I want to crunch them immediately before they accumulate to enormous numbers. This is life today buddy. No choice”.
I was puzzled. George was a senior executive in a multi-billion Euro telecom conglomerate. How could he manage such a large organization responding to every email, text message and social media alert at the same sense of urgency?
“How are you doing at your job, George?” I asked?
“I’m doing well but too busy with fire-fighting and tactical matters instead of long term strategies. Information overload becomes more challenging every year. Connectivity changes the world and enables rapid response but it is also a double-sided sword. I do not remember when was the last time I took a break to introspect and think. Thinking has been replaced by communication.”
I nodded my head in agreement.
“A few years back we had moments that we were not reachable.” I said. “We don’t have them anymore. We are reachable 24/7 and we are expected to respond rapidly because everyone assumes that we are connected anytime and everywhere”.
My sentence hanged in the air because George was typing something on his mobile after another ear defeating bzzzzzzzzzzzz.
It was a good time to order the bill and say goodbye to my very distracted friend.
Can senior executives be effective if they manage their communication in such a chaotic, reactive and random way?
No, they cannot.
Business leaders can lose the effectiveness battle to the misleading feeling of efficiency by reacting to the information overload that surrounds us.
What can we do? In this supper connected world we have to respond to the enormous amount of communication. Don’t we?
No! Not all time.
The connected world steals our inner world to the point we cannot think because we listen all the time to the noise that comes from the sources that connect us to the herd – thousands of people all the time.
We want to be in a state of mind that enables us to make the right decisions and differentiate between important matters and clatter. It is very difficult to reach a peaceful state of mind while our attention is always outward and never inward.
In order to become effective leaders we want to enable our inward focus that allows us to discern the right direction.
One of my favorite stories on the meaning of peace by an unknown author is as following:
“There once was a king who offered a prize to the artist who would paint the best picture of peace. Many artists tried. The king looked at all the pictures. But there were only two he really liked, and he had to choose between them.
One picture was of a calm lake. The lake was a perfect mirror for peaceful towering mountains all around it. Overhead was a blue sky with fluffy white clouds. All who saw this picture thought that it was a perfect picture of peace.
The other picture had mountains, too. But these were rugged and bare. Above was an angry sky, from which rain fell and in which lightning played. Down the side of the mountain tumbled a foaming waterfall. This did not look peaceful at all.
But when the king looked closely, he saw behind the waterfall a tiny bush growing in a crack in the rock. In the bush a mother bird had built her nest. There, in the midst of the rush of angry water, sat the mother bird on her nest – in perfect peace.
Which picture do you think won the prize?
The king chose the second picture. Do you know why?
“Because,” explained the king, “peace does not mean to be in a place where there is no noise, trouble, or hard work. Peace means to be in the midst of all those things and still be calm in your heart. That is the real meaning of peace.”
It is the peaceful mind that develops effective leaders. Not the non-stop connectivity and instant responding to the blur of information.
We enhance our leadership effectiveness when we leave the outer world with its unstoppable demanding connectivity and enter our inner world for just a short while. In this short break we organize our thoughts and priorities and we align our actions toward our goals.
The most effective step you can take to reach effectiveness is described in the book The Sphere of Silence by Vijay Eswaran. Vijay wrote his book before Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, LinkedIn, and other attention seeking and time sucking media channels. His quest for one hour of silence a day is great solution to be successful in the rest of the 23 hours.
The Sphere of Silence encapsulates the importance of silence in many aspects of life. In our über-connected world, silence means disconnecting from the outer world and connecting to our inner world.
The Sphere of Silence accumulates centuries of wisdom crystalized to a simple routine that takes one hour…every day…in silence.
Vijay Eswaran is not just an author of book he is also the founder and the Chairman of an international conglomerate, philanthropist and a sought after speaker. He claims that the daily one hour silence was key factor to his success.
The book was on my shelf for 5 years collecting dust.
I could not find one hour a day.
I have thousands of emails, business tasks, family commitments, community engages, physical activities….
I could not take an hour of silence!
I was wrong.
It was fortunate enough to participate in The Zone leadership development experimental seminar to have a Sphere of Silence session with Vijay Eswaran himself.
I follow the Sphere of Silence routine now with purpose.
The Sphere of Silence is a comprehensive still simple success system the one hour routine contains the following structure;
Reflection 10 minutes
Duty: Mid & Long term Goals 10 minutes
Short Term tasks 10 minutes
Knowledge 15 minutes
Devotion 15 minutes
This is the only routine that combines retrospection, planning, self-development and spirituality. These 4 pillars made the Sphere of Silence very effective and life changing for me personally.
How did I succeed to follow the routine every single day even when I was traveling or having very tight schedule?
I call it Sphere of Silence “On Steroids” (SOSOS). It means that I do the routine no matter how much time I have. Even if I have only few minutes, I will find the most important thing to reflect on, look at the most important goal I would like to achieve in the long term, the most important task I would like to achieve today, read (even if it is only one page) and pay gratitude to the creator.
In any other circumstances, I follow the time frame stated in the book. But when I cannot make the time, I just do the full routine in an accelerated way.
Only when we adopt a new habit do we see change in our life.
The Sphere of Silence enhances leadership effectiveness especially in the digital era.
Engagement Achieves Commitment
It was already noon.
The meeting was going for more than 3 hours without meaningful progress or signals of what might be a course of action.
Joan felt that she had lost control of the meeting. Wei Ming, Hong Kong General Manager, bored all of them with long, too-detailed presentation of the Mainland Chinese market. He did not smile even a single time. He was sliding his hand frequently through his black thick hair staring at the screen where he projected his slides like nobody was in the Boardroom. Wei Ming seemed like they were wasting his precious time. His South-China plan was a done deal. At least, this is what he thought.
Ying Ping, Taiwan General Manager followed him trying harder to engage and entertain. Her much lighter presentation focused on the expected high growth in North-China also failed to attract attention from the participants. Neither speakers gave any new information that the rest didn’t already know. They also didn’t attempt to bridge the gap between the two plans. Even the usually charming Ying Ping skipped eye contact with Wei Ming.
Wei Ming kept himself busy with an impressive collection of what seemed like the latest mobile gadgets. Air MacBook, iPad, Android tablet and 2 smartphones kept fully occupied with everything except the discussion.
Joan stared for a few long moments through the window of the 53rd Boardroom of the Grand Hyatt Pudong at the breathtaking view. She noticed that everybody was texting, browsing, or emailing rather that engaging in productive discussion. She announced lunch break and stayed behind to organize her thoughts.
She has to get commitment for one plan. It won’t happen without active discussion during which the pros and cons of each option will be considered carefully. No more monologues. Everyone is so wrapped up in their own “wired” world, there doesn’t seem to be engagement during meetings. She was astonished yesterday when during dinner everyone was so busy connecting with the rest of the world but not with the people sitting around the table. Mobile technology does not support building relationships.
It has to be stopped during meetings!
They came back from lunch and Joan was ready with new rules of engagement. “We have spent the whole morning without reaching any resolution or even clarity of the business direction” she opened. “Our business won’t fall apart if we will disconnect for the rest of the day. Please turn off all your communication devices – tablets, smartphones, and laptops – and let’s get down to business”.
“I cannot turn off my mobile devices” Wei Ming said impatiently. “I am expecting a notice from China Telecom regarding the software contract.”
“Wei Ming, would you lose the deal if you were flying 13 hours to US?” asked Joan.
Wei Ming didn’t reply. He had never seen Joan so decisive and determine.
“Is this meeting important?” asked Joan.
She noticed all nodding their heads in agreement.
“Then let’s treat it with respect and reach consensus on the business plan”.
“We cannot reach consensus” said Ying Ping. “Our business assumptions are wide apart.”
“So let’s narrow the gaps. Wei Ming, please present the Ying Ping’s plan. Ying Ping, Please present Wei Ming’s plan. Focus on the pros of the opposite plan”
“There aren’t any pros in Wei Ming’s plan” Ying Ping erupted.
“This is what you think. Please present the pros that he suggested. Only by showing that you listened carefully to the opposite opinion, understood it fully and asked clarifying questions, would you earn the right to object. You don’t earn the right to object before you show that you can present the positive side of your counter plan. Does it make sense?”
There was silence in the Boardroom. Everyone look at each other with what Joan felt as shame.
“I agree” announced Warren, the CFO, turning off his tablet with exaggerating movement and put it in his bag.
The rest followed within seconds, even Wei Ming reluctantly.
It was a turnaround in the meeting. Everyone engaged in passionate conversation. Not surprisingly Wei Ming and Yong Ping had difficulties reiterating the opposite plan’s pros. In the next two hours they tried to challenge each other plan’s strengths. By 4:00 pm it was clear to everyone that both plans are viable and each plan had advantages and disadvantages.
It was James Miller, the Vice President of Sales, that broke into the discussion asking “can we integrate the North-China plan with the South-China plan?”
“Right!” added Samantha Anderson, the Vice President Marketing. “We keep the strengths and eliminate the weaknesses of both plans”.
“Warren, wouldn’t that increase our overheads significantly?” asked Joan.
“Not really. The overheads won’t be high if we open two modest offices and engage shared services in finance and marketing. It is actually a brilliant idea” replied Warren.
Everyone got excited except Wei Ming and Ying Ping. “What do you think?” Joan turned to them.
“Who will be the leader of China? We need one General Manager. China is one country. I am supposed to relocate to Shanghai to lead the market. Where do I stand in a combined plan?”
“That’s a valid point Wei Ming but let’s leave the personal decisions for later on and agree first on the solution” said Joan.
“It’s not personal.” Wei Ming responded irritated. “We shouldn’t differentiate leadership from the solution. The real decision is who will be the leader”.
Joan observed Ying Ping turning red. Then she exploded without noticing she is speaking Chinese “it’s all about you and your ego. Isn’t it?”
“Hold on” Joan intervened. “Let’s stick to the solution…and to English” she smiled. “The decision regarding leadership is important and we will not avoid it. Do you have objections to two business centers in Guangzhou and Shanghai? “
Joan spent the next 30 minutes asking each participant for objections, clarifications and commitment for execution.
This is the step most executives skip and what hits them back when plans are executed. There are always key players that do not support the plan and do not reveal their objections. They passively don’t go the extra mile needed to implement agreed plans. Most business plans require the extra mile. If individuals don’t support eventually they will fail their teams ‘innocently’, ‘nonchalantly’ and ‘inattentively’. These are the most dangerous players in corporate teams. They are like snakes that raise their heads long after decision was taken without sharing their objections at the decision point.
Joan didn’t want this to happen. She looked into the eyes of each one of them when she asked for objections, concerns and commitments. The verbal commitment was more important than the signed resolution.
Wei Ming and Ying Ping were still hesitating. It was only after they were guaranteed inclusion in the leadership plan that they admitted that from business perspective it was a good plan and they would support its execution.
They had a coffee break and Joan took the opportunity to offer Wei Ming and Ying Ping co-leadership positions. They will both be relocated to China, incorporate a new company, become the directors and hire a new local Mainland Chinese General Manager. They agreed on the spot.
An hour later, they summarized the plan and the action items and left to their rooms. Tomorrow they will prepare the execution plan.
Joan was exhausted but satisfied. She called Michael Johnson, the CEO, and briefed him on the results of the meeting.
“Good work Joan. It’s a good plan and as long as everybody is on board, I believe it will turn around our business. Good night” Michael did not wait for response. He couldn’t see Joan’s big smile.
Winner or Loser
Joan’s heart beat was fluttering while “flying” from Pudong Airport at a speed of 430 km/h hanging a few meters above the buildings. She was thrilled and disoriented, refusing to believe that she is on a train. The Shanghai Magnetic Levitation Train is the world’s fastest ground transportation, faster than a Formula 1 car. She arrived at her stop in less than 8 minutes and was transferred to the Grand- Hyatt. Time to refresh before meeting the rest of the team for dinner.
Joan stood for a few minutes staring at the magnificent view from her room on the 72nd floor. The Huangpu River cuts Shanghai into two parts each side a different world: the west side, Puxi, with its historical buildings and on the east side, Pudong, with its impressive modern skyline. Joan was fascinated by the view to the point she did not feel her jetlag. She headed to the river to take a walk and organize her thoughts.
The Bund river promenade at sunset was packed with tourists, vendors and just strollers who were not bothered by the chilly breeze. Joan reflected as she walked. She decided to avoid business discussions at dinner. They have two intensive days to finalize their China plan. Then Susan, the new Board member, will coordinate 2 days of meetings with government officials and potential business partners.
Joan, the COO of Star West, has been asked to introduce a new business plan for China in order to turn around the extended drop in sales. Her team’s efforts ended with a plan to develop the market in southern China to be managed by Hong Kong General Manager Wei Ming. An alternative plan was designed by the ambitious Taiwan General Manger Ying Ping who believed that northern China would be a better market. Both Wei Ming and Ying Ping are ready with tons of slides, charts and research to support their opinions.
The problem is that everyone knows Joan supports the southern China plan. It puts her in the position of being biased toward one side. “Is this the reason Susan, the new Board member, got involved?” Joan wondered aloud.
Joan feels that the biggest mistakes she has made in her transformation from functional to general management has been to take a stand before knowing all the needed information. She also has had difficulty dealing with new information that might affect decision making. She makes a mental note to herself “Review new information without holding onto love for previous ones.”
Change is tough!
She believes in the original plan for southern China. It was backed by most of Star West’s clients in southern China. However, some people think differently and she will have to deal with it.
Again she says out loud to no one, “How can I avoid the personal agenda of Wei Ming who wants to move to Guangzhou or that of Ying Ping who wants to move to Shanghai”?
Wei Ming is a reserved and articulate executive who had a great career in sales before joining Star West two years ago. Ying Ping is exactly the opposite. She is emotional, outspoken and a great communicator but less organized than Wei Ming. She joined Star West also two years ago after 20 years in software marketing to the electronic industry.
Joan’s thought race forward. If two managers promote two different plans, then when we decide to implement one plan the promoter of this plan wins and the promoter of the other plan loses. Can we afford to have one feels like a “loser”? Will the “loser” contribute with the same passion, and dedication he/she would contribute to their own plan? Joan has debated this issue since she became COO. In the new job, she needs a cross-functional viewpoint instead of a single business dimension that finance, operations or marketing managers normally have.
This is a typical transition that functional managers need to make to be successful in general management roles. They have to grow to see the various aspects of the business and support decisions that can be contrary to their functional role. If, for example, CFOs look only at cost saving in every business decision in the way they did as Financial Controllers, they miss the opportunity to drive business as part of the general management team.
Joan reached the end of the Bund promenade and turned back. She decided to erase her original plans, decisions and beliefs. She will facilitate the decision process without prejudgments.
But…
How can she direct two people who hold conflicting opinions? People are reluctant to surrender old beliefs. They tend to use new ideas to validate existing beliefs.
Joan was concentrating so much on her dilemma that she didn’t notice that people were looking at her talking to herself out loud while walking in the crowd.
Joan wondered if there is a third plan which could combine both the northern and southern plans. Joan startled the strollers next to her by speaking excitedly “I got it! If we derive a new plan from the 2 existing ones using the advantages and removing the disadvantages, we will have a plan where everyone wins. We can expand the north and south at the same time and take advantage of the experience of both Wei Ming and Ying Ping”. With a loud “YES” she made a high-5 in the air to no one, receiving knowing smiles from the crowd around her who seemed to enjoy her excitement.
At that point Joan started to believe that she will succeed to coalesce two directions into one plan. Now, Joan was excited to meet her colleagues. Tonight she will enjoy herself…no business talk!
Only tomorrow will she discover how difficult it is to change people’s minds…
Where Is Your Team?
Joan passed the security checkpoint and proceeded to the United First Class Lounge in the San Francisco International Airport. She had just found out that she would fly to Shanghai with Susan Taylor, the new member of the Board of Directors.
“Susan is not all bad news” Joan thought joyfully. “I wouldn’t fly First Class otherwise”. The ‘bad news’ was waiting for her at the lounge wearing a dark business suit and looked like she was ready for a CNBC interview. Joan felt uncomfortable in her very comfortable denim jeans.
Susan waived to Joan like an old friend. “Good to see you again Joan. Isn’t it exciting? We are going to have great time in Shanghai.” Joan was not so sure, but replied “Sure, Susan.” It was only after a few more pleasantries and champagne that Susan told Joan about her childhood in China, the challenging immigration to the U.S., speaking only Mandarin and the obstacles she overcame to get on top of the investment banking game. Joan was more reserved but reciprocated with her career and family story.
By the time the flight took off, Susan and Joan were deep in conversation. Joan’s plan to get a long sleep on board was forgotten.
The food was excellent. The service was efficient without being interruptive. Two hours into the flight, Susan asked gently “Joan, can I share with you my impressions from my first Star West board meeting?”
“Sure Susan. I would love to hear your feedback” replied Joan, surprised by her excitement about what Susan had to say. She admitted that Susan is brilliant and charming. She has an ability to connect quickly and spice conversation with wit and wisdom. Joan felt very comfortable and glad to have her as a companion on this trip. This feeling didn’t last long.
“I have never worked in a traditional corporate structure” Susan started. “In my investment banking career I spent a lot of time with CEOs and their teams. I watched them in the most stressful moments of their business lives: Entrepreneurs trying to transform their dream start-ups into multi-billion dollar conglomerates through IPOs; CEOs who raise funds from capital markets for businesses that stop growing; executive teams that struggle to convert debt to equity. Some were successful. Some were not. It was only after a decade that I started to see patterns of success and failure in the teams that I worked with. I shared this insight with my team. As a game, we used it to predict the success or failure of an IPO or fund raising. We ended up with a simple, yet reliable, team assessment tool.”
“What was the tool?” Joan asked eagerly.
“Hold on. The good is yet to come” smiled Susan. “We played that game for selfish reasons. Every IPO was followed by commissions and perks. We usually managed 2 to 3 IPOs at the same time. Allocation of our time to the IPOs with the biggest chance of success was crucial for our success”.
“Surprisingly, while we played ‘the guess who game’, we became the most successful IPO team in Goldman Sachs within a year.”
“How did that happen?” asked Susan curiously.
“Well, as we discussed the weaknesses of our clients’ teams, we started to avoid the same mistakes and improved our own team work. Imagine that we were a team of 5, each having graduated top of the class from the best law, finance and business schools”.
“I can imagine a collision of egos” Susan interrupted laughing.
“Exactly” Susan laughed. “There were many collisions until we witnessed brilliant teams losing their dreams because of big egos. They had much more to lose than mere commissions. They lost the once in a lifetime opportunity to have a successful IPO.”
“That is painful” nodded Susan, thinking about Star West’s delayed IPO that attracted her to the company in the first place.
“When I assessed your team in yesterday’s Board meeting as I did many times previously using the same prediction tool, the result is…… a failing team.” Susan said with sadness in her voice.
Surprisingly Joan was not defensive as Susan expected. “What did you see?” Joan asked.
“I saw 8 individuals that work in isolation rather than as a team” Susan replied without hesitation. “When Sam, your Vice President of Marketing was not ready with the market share information, she didn’t feel accountable for it and nobody else did either.”
“It is her responsibility as a Vice President of Marketing, isn’t it?” wondered Joan.
“No. It’s the responsibility of each of you, given that market share is your key performance indicator (KPI) as it should be.” Susan fired back.
Joan was fully switched on. “With all due respect to all the work you have done in the past, I disagree with your observation” Joan voice was becoming loud enough that most passengers turned to look at her.
“We have clear cut responsibilities and accountabilities” Joan quieted her voice. “We define ‘owner and driver’ for every project even if it falls within an individual’s job description. Sam definitely has sole responsibility for market share.”
“So who’s problem is it that your team doesn’t track market share? Does it help that you have ‘drivers’ but they don’t get things done?”
Joan was silent. Susan was right. Owner-Driver accountability at Star West usually is post mortem finger pointing rather than successful execution of growth initiatives.
“Only when the team has ownership for the results and only when the team is accountable, will the members work together to accomplish them, no matter who is the driver. The team members will support each other, back each other up, and compensate for each other’s weaknesses.” Susan was aiming straight at the problem.
“Star West’s current style of ‘owner-driver’ accountability is doomed to fail because it supports individualism rather than team work. This was exactly what our team discovered working with various entrepreneurs and CEOs. As long as members are accountable for their own area of responsibility rather than that of the whole team, success is doubtful.” Susan spoke thoughtfully.
Joan thought for a few seconds and pondered: “Isn’t the CFO responsible for finance, the CIO for Information Technology and so on? Why should Vice President of Customer Service be responsible for market share if it falls under the VP of Marketing?”
“If you guys agree that market share is your company’s goal, then it becomes your key performance indicator. If it’s your team key performance indicator, then each one of you is accountable for market share even though it falls under the responsibility of the Marketing VP.” said Susan. “So, that makes Sam the ‘driver’ and the team members all ‘owners’.”
Joan challenged Susan, “Each one of us has our own responsibilities. It is impossible to run a business when we are all accountable for everything”.
“You are not all accountable for everything. You are accountable for what you agreed as the corporation’s most important goals and your team’s deliverables. Your accountability as a team member is to follow up with your peers on their assignments and they are accountable to follow up on yours. More than that; you should call them on it when they don’t meet deadlines. You should push them with one hand and offer help with the other. There is nothing stronger than peer pressure”.
“I think I got it” Joan said. “I had a confrontation with Warren, the CFO, regarding the investment in a Chinese product that hadn’t done well. I called him on his accountability but felt that I was just as accountable as was the rest of the team. Yet, we had never defined it as a team goal.”
“Ambiguity in KPIs is the biggest enemy of any team. Then the team is just a group of individuals executing their own KPIs.” Susan was amazed how fast Joan grasped the essence of the problem and reflected upon herself to make corrections.
For a few minutes Joan and Susan sat quietly. The flight attendants dimmed the lights. Each looked at her watch. It was 3 hours since departure. Ten hours left before arrival in Shanghai. They decided to sleep and continue the conversation later.
Joan couldn’t fall asleep. The more she thought about team ownership instead of individual ownership for tasks, goals and projects, the more it made sense to her. It means that even performance reviews and bonuses should not be allocated solely on individual achievements but be based on the team’s achievements.
United flight 857 from San Francisco to Pudong is the best business course she has ever taken.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Recent Comments