Category Archive: Leading Change

The Five Practices Of Leadership

Posted by on June 2, 2009

 

I am constantly reading new materials on leadership and occasionally I review great books from the past.  One of the all time classics is The Leadership Challenge by James Kouzes and Barry Posner.

This very exhaustive book centers around these five simple but very powerful practices:

 Model The Way-Find your voice by clarifying your personal values and set the example by aligning actions with shared values.

 Inspire a Shard Vision-Envision the future by imagining exciting and ennobling possibilities and enlist others in a common vision by appealing to shared aspirations.

Challenge The Process-Search for opportunities by seeking innovative ways to change, grow, and improve and experiment and take risks by constantly generating small wins and learning from mistakes.

Enable Others to Act-Foster collaboration by promoting cooperative goals and building trust.  Strengthen others by sharing power and discretion.

 Encourage The Heart-Recognize contributions by showing appreciation for individual excellence and celebrate the values and victories by creating a spirit of community.        

   

Leading By Storytelling

Posted by on June 1, 2009

Every leader is constantly trying to find new and creative ways to communicate the culture of their organization both internally and externally.  I have found not better way than storytelling.

The simplest definition of storytelling is when you can link existing personnel, ongoing programming and outstanding performance then you have a story to tell.  This will allow you to reinforce core values and celebrate success by acknowledging over and above situations that give credit to your people and remind everyone of what is really important.

In essence if you have no stories to tell then you are not performing in critical areas.  The good news in most organizations there are character driven people that are doing an outstanding job.  The bad news is their stories are not being told.

I have never seen this work informally by just asking people for outstanding results during a meeting or telling a few stories during annual meeting.  This will probably require formalizing this entire process to create a system where stories can be routinely asked for and submitted to someone who can evaluate them and then find appropriate platform for communication.

This must not feel like a monthly performance review system where everyone is checked against their numbers.  It needs to be like what happened great in your area this month that would encourage everyone in the organization to know.

The formula is simple existing personnel + ongoing programming + outstanding performance = Success.  The only missing piece is telling the story.

The Doom Loop

Posted by on May 13, 2009

In sharp contrast to the breakthrough impact of the companies that practiced the flywheel effect all of the organizations that could not transition from Good to Great were caught in The Doom Loop.  Instead of the consistent daily movement of the flywheel they went for the big impact event that would give the immediate impression of progress only later to regress into failure.

They were not willing to use the deliberate process of figuring out what needed to be done and then simply doing it.  “The comparison companies frequently launched new programs-often with great fanfare and hoopla aimed at motivating the troops-only to see the programs fail to produce sustained results.”

They wanted the big event or the grand program or the new celebrity CEO that would allow them to skip the daily discipline of the flywheel and move immediately to breakthrough. The repeated pattern of this cycle consistently produced disappointing results and then reaction without understanding starts the loop all over again.

Peter Drucker commented on these companies, “The drive for mergers and acquisitions comes less from sound reasoning and more from the fact that doing deals is a much more exciting way to spend your day than doing actual work.”

The Doom Loop is a classic example of an organization continuing to do the same wrong things over and over again and yet somehow expecting different results.  At the core of this problem is a leadership team that is more concerned with short term personal success than what is best for the long term benefit of everyone involved?

In the end this is not a strategy problem but a character one.

The Flywheel

Posted by on May 12, 2009

The concept of the flywheel was used by Jim Collins in his best selling leadership book Good to Great.  The major point of the illustration is that significant change occurs when you do the right things repeatedly over time and eventually you will have a breakthrough that results in significant success.

We all would love to have the quick fix strategy work instead, we want instant culture change.  For every company that moved from Good to Great there was no single defining action, no grand programs, no celebrity leader and no one killer innovation that produced the results.

“Good to great comes about by a cumulative process—step by step, action by action, decision by decision, turn by turn of the flywheel—that adds up to sustained and spectacular results.”

A great example that really makes the point is used is from the legendary coaching career of John Wooden at UCLA.  Most basketball fans know that he won ten NCAA Championships in twelve years and at one point had a sixty-one-game winning streak.

What most of us do not know is that for fifteen years coach Wooden worked in relative obscurity at UCLA before he ever won his first national title.  During that time he was building the foundation for the program of great recruiting, player discipline and refining his style of playing the full court press style of defense.

The real character question for leaders today is how many are willing to pay the price of not demanding short term success at the expense of long term sustainability for the organization?  It may keep you off the front page of the business section of your local paper but in this economic environment that can be a very good thing.

Communicating New Vision

Posted by on May 8, 2009

 

After you know that you have top down buy in to the new vision for your organization, you need to create a team that can develop a strategic plan for the change you need that will allow you to move into the future.  I cannot tell you the number of times I have reached this point in the process with great new ideas and the approval to implement the necessary changes only to fail.

The next step is that is extremely important is communicating the change vision.  In all my years of doing this I think this is the beginning point of where the process starts to break down.  We all have served on teams and worked for months on change initiatives and come out of the process totally together and passionate only to meet one year later trying to decide why the plan died.

What we simply fail to remember is that we have thought, discussed, and even hotly debated these ideas for literally hundreds of hours and the people who are on the front lines for execution have had no exposure whatsoever.  We always undervalue the process of bringing everyone else up to speed and wonder why in the end they simply don’t get it.

There are several key criteria for effective communication.  They are: keep it simple, use multiple forums and methods, repetition, repetition, repetition, and environments that allow give and take.  The only way I have found to know that people have got it, is to let them hear everything they need over time and then let them ask questions and give back to me in their own words what we want them to understand.

Another very important aspect of communicating vision is that the leaders must be prepared to immediately walk their talk.  John Kotter writes based on his research, “Nothing undermines the communication of a change vision more than behavior on the part of key players that seems inconsistent with the vision.”  If the vision is empowering teams and the top leaders of the company are still micromanaging everything you can be sure the plan is dead.

 

Three Critical Questions For Leading Change

Posted by on April 22, 2009

 

I want to tell you a simple story that illustrates  what every leader must do to lead their team or entire organization through the change process.  You are the leader of a team that has been involved in an outward bound teambuilding session for two weeks.

Your team is out in open and you are eating your lunch on the ground.  The weather conditions are changing and you are monitoring the situation on weather radio.

In first scenario you as team leader say to your team in stern voice get up and follow me right now.  A few people respond but the majority stay in place.  Now you raise your voice and yell I said come with me.

The second scenario you say as the leader we are going to move.  Here is the plan, we are going to stand up together at the same time and form a single file column and make sure no one runs or gets left behind.  The group is very hesitant to get up and it takes time to get everyone in a line and progress is slow.

The third scenario is you say to team there is a tornado less than five minutes from here, follow me to that brick building and we will all be safe.  Everyone moves and no one is hurt.

In the first situation the leader tried to use positional power which almost never works anymore especially with next generation workforce.  The second scene was perfect example of trying to manage the change process instead of leading.  The major reason most change initiatives fail is they are over managed and under led.

The bottom line for me is this based on our simple little story.  Leaders always need to answer three questions when they want an individual or an entire organization to change.  What is the Problem?  How are we going to Solve it?  Why is this important to You?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Leading Change

Posted by on April 15, 2009

The greatest mistake organizations make during difficult times like we are currently experiencing is to try to manage change rather than leading the process.  Sometimes survival is the only critical issue and then you do whatever you have to do to stay alive.

Most of time though we look very short term and develop a bunker mentality that’s only goal is to ride out this storm until things get better.  This means of course reducing expenses through personnel reductions , delays in capital investment, marketing and of course training and development.  Especially, all those bad trips and conferences that congress is railing about.

Leading change recognizes the brutal facts that the fundamentals of global economics have been permanently changed.  Effective leaders will use the urgency and severity of this current cycle to reposition their entire organizational culture for success in the 21st Century and beyond.  The future is incredibly positive for all those who are willing to embrace it.  No going back!

 

Four Critical Team Dynamics for Leading Change

Posted by on April 7, 2009

                             

How many teams have we put together over the years to help us lead the change process only to realize several months later that nothing happened that was sustainable?  In John Kotter’s excellent book on Leading Change he gives four key characteristics that must be in place for the team to be successful.

1.      Position power:  Are enough key players on board, especially the main line managers, so that those left out cannot easily block progress?

2.      Expertise:  Are the various points of view- in terms of discipline, work experience etc.- relevant to the task at hand adequately represented so that informed, intelligent decisions will be made?

3.      Credibility:  Does the group have enough people with good reputations in the firm so that its pronouncements will be taken seriously by other employees?

4.      Leadership:  Does the group include enough proven leaders to be able to drive the change process?

 

When I have been responsible for leading major change initiatives all of these types of people must be involved.  The other important dynamic is that you must avoid people who will try to take over the group and lead by positional power and the other extreme of individuals who will not engage and confront the brutal facts with their active participation.

 

 

Seven Lessons for Leading in Crisis

Posted by on April 2, 2009

Virtually every American institution is facing major crises these days, from declining businesses to evaporating financial portfolios. To get out of these crises, authentic leaders must step forward and lead their organizations through them.
The current crisis was not caused by subprime mortgages, credit default swaps, or failed economic policies. The root cause is failed leadership. New laws, regulations, and economic bailouts won’t heal wounds created by leadership failures. They can only be solved by new leaders with the wisdom and skill to put their organizations on the right long-term course. “Seven Lessons for Leading in Crisis”
The Wall Street Journal – February 24, 2009

 

Bill George

Here are seven lessons for leaders charged with leading their organizations through a crisis:
Lesson #1: “Leaders must face reality.” Reality starts with the person in charge. Leaders need to look themselves in the mirror and recognize their role in creating the problems. Then they should gather their teams together and gain agreement about the root causes. Widespread recognition of reality is the crucial step before problems can be solved. Attempting to find short-term fixes that address the symptoms of the crisis only ensures the organization will wind up back in the same predicament.

In order to understand the real reasons for the crisis, everyone on the leadership team must be willing to tell the whole truth. As J.P. Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon said at a panel I chaired at the World Economic Forum at Davos in January, “It’s not sufficient to have one person on your team who is a truth teller. Everyone on the team must be candid in sharing the entire truth, no matter how painful it is.” How can we solve problems if we don’t acknowledge their existence?

Lesson #2: “No matter how bad things are, they will get worse.” Faced with bad news, many leaders cannot believe that things could really be so grim. Consequently, they try to convince the bearers of bad news that things aren’t so bad, and swift action can make problems go away.

This causes leaders to undershoot the mark in terms of corrective actions. As a consequence, they wind up taking a series of steps, none of which is powerful enough to correct the downward spiral. It is far better for leaders to anticipate the worst and get out in front of it. If they restructure their cost base for the worst case, they can get their organization healthy for the turnaround when it comes and take advantage of opportunities that present themselves.

Lesson #3: “Build a mountain of cash, and get to the highest hill.” In good times leaders worry more about earnings per share and revenue growth than they do about their balance sheets. In a crisis, cash is king. Forget about EPS and all those stock market measures. The question is, “Does your organization have sufficient cash to survive the most dire circumstances?”

Goldman Sachs, where I serve on the board of directors, anticipated the difficult times and built up its cash reserves. When the markets got really bad, Goldman had adequate cash reserves to weather the storm.

Lesson #4: “Get the world off your shoulders.” In a crisis, many leaders act like Atlas, carrying the weight of the world on their shoulders. They go into isolation, and think they can solve the problem themselves. In reality, leaders must have the help of all their people to devise solutions and to implement them. This means bringing people into their confidence, asking them for help and ideas, and gaining their commitment to painful corrective actions.

Lesson #5: “Before asking others to sacrifice, first volunteer yourself. If there are sacrifices to be made – and there will be – then the leaders should step up and make the greatest sacrifices themselves. Crises are the real tests of leaders’ True North. Everyone is watching to see what the leaders do. Will they stay true to their values? Will they bow to external pressures, or confront the crisis in a straight-forward manner? Will they be seduced by short-term rewards, or will they make near-term sacrifices in order to fix the long-term situation?

Lesson #6: “Never waste a good crisis.” This piece of advice comes from Benjamin Netanyahu, the next prime minister of Israel, at the panel I chaired in Davos.

When things are going well, people resist major changes or try to get by with minor adaptations. A crisis provides the leader with the platform to get things done that were required anyway and offers the sense of urgency to accelerate their implementation.

Lesson #7: “Be aggressive in the marketplace.” This may sound counter-intuitive, but a crisis offers the best opportunity to change the game in your favor, with new products or services to gain market share. Many people look at a crisis as something to get through, until they can go back to business as usual. But “business as usual” never returns because markets are irrevocably changed. Why not create the changes that move the market in your favor, instead of waiting and reacting to the changes as they take place?

The Bottom Line:
In a crisis we learn who the real leaders are, and whether they have the wherewithal to stay on course of their True North.

About the Author
Bill George, author of “True North,” is a professor of management practice at Harvard Business School. He is also the former CEO of Medtronic and serves on the boards of directors of ExxonMobil, Goldman Sachs and Novartis.

 

 

 

 

Crashing Churches

Posted by on March 13, 2009

It seems that a week cannot go by without hearing about another church that is in crisis.  The issues have gotten to the point where the entire community knows about the problems as well as people outside the area.

The amazing thing is that once you evaluate what went wrong in almost every situation it had nothing to do with a moral failure with the leader or some controversy concerning doctrine. At the end of the day, there was a leadership failure within the church that directly related to how people should relate to each other.

People on all sides of the issues, from the pastor to the pew do not apply the principles of Matthew 18 where you should go and talk directly to someone instead of talking about them behind their backs with other people.  Often times these conversations are veiled under the acceptable premise of sharing prayer requests when in reality they are nothing more than gossip.

When someone comes to you with negative comments about another person you have an opportunity to be a part of the solution or a part of the problem.  My first question is always the same, Have you talked with this person directly about this problem? 

If the answer is no, I will not listen to what they have to say and I will challenge them to go and speak with the other person.  If the answer is yes, and there are still issues then I will be glad to get involved and see if I can help resolve the conflict.

In the strictest sense this really is a theological problem.   It is not one though where there is disagreement on what the scriptures say, it is simply a failure on all sides to be obedient to clear teaching that cannot be denied.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Crashing Churches

 

It seems that a week cannot go by without hearing about another church that is in crisis.  The issues have gotten to the point where the entire community knows about the problems as well as people outside the area.

The amazing thing is that once you evaluate what went wrong in almost every situation it had nothing to do with a moral failure with the leader or some controversy concerning doctrine. At the end of the day, there was a leadership failure within the church that directly related to how people should relate to each other.

People on all sides of the issues, from the pastor to the pew do not apply the principles of Matthew 18 where you should go and talk directly to someone instead of talking about them behind their backs with other people.  Often times these conversations are veiled under the acceptable premise of sharing prayer requests when in reality they are nothing more than gossip.

When someone comes to you with negative comments about another person you have an opportunity to be a part of the solution or a part of the problem.  My first question is always the same, Have you talked with this person directly about this problem? 

If the answer is no, I will not listen to what they have to say and I will challenge them to go and speak with the other person.  If the answer is yes, and there are still issues then I will be glad to get involved and see if I can help resolve the conflict.

In the strictest sense this really is a theological problem.   It is not one though where there is disagreement on what the scriptures say, it is simply a failure on all sides to be obedient to clear teaching that cannot be denied.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Crashing Churches

 

It seems that a week cannot go by without hearing about another church that is in crisis.  The issues have gotten to the point where the entire community knows about the problems as well as people outside the area.

The amazing thing is that once you evaluate what went wrong in almost every situation it had nothing to do with a moral failure with the leader or some controversy concerning doctrine. At the end of the day, there was a leadership failure within the church that directly related to how people should relate to each other.

People on all sides of the issues, from the pastor to the pew do not apply the principles of Matthew 18 where you should go and talk directly to someone instead of talking about them behind their backs with other people.  Often times these conversations are veiled under the acceptable premise of sharing prayer requests when in reality they are nothing more than gossip.

When someone comes to you with negative comments about another person you have an opportunity to be a part of the solution or a part of the problem.  My first question is always the same, Have you talked with this person directly about this problem? 

If the answer is no, I will not listen to what they have to say and I will challenge them to go and speak with the other person.  If the answer is yes, and there are still issues then I will be glad to get involved and see if I can help resolve the conflict.

In the strictest sense this really is a theological problem.   It is not one though where there is disagreement on what the scriptures say, it is simply a failure on all sides to be obedient to clear teaching that cannot be denied.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Crashing Churches

 

It seems that a week cannot go by without hearing about another church that is in crisis.  The issues have gotten to the point where the entire community knows about the problems as well as people outside the area.

The amazing thing is that once you evaluate what went wrong in almost every situation it had nothing to do with a moral failure with the leader or some controversy concerning doctrine. At the end of the day, there was a leadership failure within the church that directly related to how people should relate to each other.

People on all sides of the issues, from the pastor to the pew do not apply the principles of Matthew 18 where you should go and talk directly to someone instead of talking about them behind their backs with other people.  Often times these conversations are veiled under the acceptable premise of sharing prayer requests when in reality they are nothing more than gossip.

When someone comes to you with negative comments about another person you have an opportunity to be a part of the solution or a part of the problem.  My first question is always the same, Have you talked with this person directly about this problem? 

If the answer is no, I will not listen to what they have to say and I will challenge them to go and speak with the other person.  If the answer is yes, and there are still issues then I will be glad to get involved and see if I can help resolve the conflict.

In the strictest sense this really is a theological problem.   It is not one though where there is disagreement on what the scriptures say, it is simply a failure on all sides to be obedient to clear teaching that cannot be denied.