What is required to be an effective leader in today’s totally disruptive business world?

A discussion and running theme that seems to be on every leadership and executive director’s mind, is ‘what is required to be an effective leader in today’s totally disruptive business world’?

Experts have opined for decades on the reasons behind the spectacular failure rates of strategy execution.
In 2016, it was estimated that 67% of well-formulated strategies failed due to poor execution.
There are many explanations for this abysmal failure rate, but a 10-year longitudinal study on executive leadership conducted by my firm showed one clear reason.
A full 61% of executives told us they were not prepared for the strategic challenges they faced upon being appointed to senior leadership roles.
It’s no surprise, then, that 50%–60% of executives fail within the first 18 months of being promoted or hired.

Becoming a disruptive leader is not a straightforward journey, no matter your background. It requires the embrace of wholesale change, the nurturing of innovative thinking and behavior, and the management of outcomes rather than resources. It requires a personal transformation that many will choose not to make.

Over the past year, we’ve been struck by how many times we’ve heard C-suite leaders use these words, or very similar ones, to describe the strengths they believe are critical to transforming their businesses, and to competing effectively in a disruptive era.

What’s equally striking is how difficult organisations are finding it to embed these qualities and behaviors in their people. That’s because the primary obstacle is invisible: the internal resistance that all human beings experience, often unconsciously, when they’re asked to make a significant change.

Cognitively, it shows up as mindset — fixed beliefs and assumptions about what will make us successful and what won’t. Emotionally, it usually takes the form of fear.

Amazon changed how we buy things. Netflix transformed how we consume videos. And companies like Airbnb and Uber have shaken up the hotel and transportation industries.

A few years ago, digital disruption was something that happened to someone else. Now, no company is immune.
Disruptive technologies, products, services and business models are being introduced almost daily. So executives need to take charge of their organisation’s response to ensure long-term business success.

But while many organisations are eager to “get ahead of the curve” on digital, there’s no instruction manual or template on how to do it successfully.

A recent KPMG survey of chief executives and chief information officers found that while most are concerned about digital disruption, few are adequately prepared to address it.

Although digital may be disrupting your business model, it also creates opportunities for those that embrace change. Organisations that don’t will find it increasingly difficult to catch up as technology continues to advance rapidly.

So where do you start?

First, understand how digital disruption is affecting your products, services and business model. Then develop a digital strategy. That includes acquiring the necessary digital skills and getting the company to buy into the required changes.

KPMG’s CIO Advisory survey shows this won’t be easy.

The majority of CIOs (58 percent) and almost half of the CEOs (43 percent) are involved or very involved in their firm’s digital business strategy. But only a small number are actively leading the effort.

Given the magnitude of digital disruption, the lack of strong leadership could have a major impact on the company’s ability to adapt.

Companies must master and implement new technologies. That requires new skills, many of which are in short supply. Most CIOs in the KPMG survey cited a lack of critical skills and the limits of existing IT systems as their biggest challenges.

There are no quick solutions to these challenges. But first, companies need to develop a strategy. Without one, it is impossible to tackle the other issues.

Final thought, the complexity of the challenges that organisations face is running far out ahead of the complexity of the thinking required to address them.

Consider the story of the consultant brought in by the CEO to help solve a specific problem: the company is too centralised in its decision making. The consultant has a solution: decentralise. Empower more people to make decisions. And so it is done, with great effort and at great expense. Two years pass, the company is still struggling, and a new CEO brings in a new consultant. We have a problem, the CEO explains. We’re too decentralised. You can guess the solution.

The primary challenge most large companies now face is disruption, the response to which requires a new strategy, new processes, and a new set of behaviors.
But if employees have long been valued and rewarded for behaviors such as practicality, consistency, self-reliance, and prudence, why wouldn’t they find it uncomfortable to suddenly embrace behaviors such as innovation, agility, collaboration, and boldness?
Einstein was right that:

“We can’t solve our problems from the same level of thinking that created them.”

Human development is about progressively seeing more. Learning to embrace our own complexity is what makes it possible to manage more complexity.

Do we have international differences in corporate governance and conduct?

There has been much discussion of late on the values of corporate governance in companies and more importantly the international differences in governance and agenda. As we both advise on company boards, I decided to speak to my business partner in the US, Mark Herbert, and create some joint thoughts on the matter.

Some of the questions we discussed:
“How do you know a board is effective?”
“Do you balance trust with challenging discourse?”
“Is the CEO engaged enough with the board?”
“How can the board challenge management with critical questions without engagement and collaboration?”
“Do you engage in a continuous improvement process?”

As you can imagine, our discussions were quite heated on leadership and at times in the lack of engaged leadership in business today.
The first matter we considered was: “Is there such a thing as a typical board of directors, since size and composition will vary according to a company’s needs?”

Board size can range from five to eighteen board members, though the average board size across Europe stands at about nine members. Regardless of board size, there are certain practices that should be followed to achieve optimal results. Overall, it is important to establish the desired board profile for your company by identifying the types of directors needed in relation to your business goals and ambition.

The composition of boards continues to be a focus for investors, and companies are responding by paying increased attention both to who sits on their boards and to enhancing their disclosure and engagement with investors. The data reported in the 2016 Spencer Stuart Board Index on S&P 500 boards highlights emerging practices, compiled from proxy disclosure and a related survey. Overall, the trends have stayed steady from last year but represent a meaningful departure from 10 years ago.

Directors sit on an average of 2.1 boards. 74% of boards have an over-boarding policy to limit the total number of boards on which directors may serve; 76% set it at three or four boards. Only 43% of CEOs serve on one or more outside boards, the same as last year, but more than a 10% decrease from 10 years ago.

Many companies regularly review the list of skills that are desirable on the board and match them with board members’ profiles. Directors’ “softer” skills and personalities should not be forgotten as they are instrumental in establishing appropriate board dynamics. When deciding on the composition of your board of directors, you should keep in mind the balance between the number of executive directors (board members who are part of the company’s executive team) and nonexecutive directors (board members who are not part of the company’s executive team). You may also want to consider having independent non-executive directors on the board.

On average, 49 percent of board seats in Europe are held by independent, non-executive directors. Such directors can bring real value to your company by providing new business opportunities and more independent, objective advice. They also can provide constructive criticism, to an extent which is unlikely to come from within the company. When thinking about your board’s profile, you should keep in mind the practicalities related to the size of the board. In other words, consider that the effectiveness of the discussion is impaired when there are too many people around the table. Larger boards of directors are not always the best source of constructive challenge or fresh ideas.

Generally common convention suggests that a board size of between seven to 10 directors is optimal for most companies. Equally important is the issue of gender balance. This issue has received a lot of attention recently, since women tend to be under-represented on boards. In Europe, in particular, this issue is pertinent, since only about 12 percent of boards have a female board member.

While public attention mostly focuses on governance for larger and listed companies, many business leaders of smaller companies understand that the fundamental principles of corporate governance such as transparency, responsibility, accountability and fairness are beneficial to all companies, regardless of listing status or size.

Corporate governance is crucial for increasing an SME’s ability to attract funding from both direct investment and credit institutions. Good governance is particularly important to shareholders of unlisted SMEs. In most cases, these shareholders are less protected by regulators, have limited ability to sell their shares, and are dependent on controlling shareholders. Accordingly, the higher risk implicit in owning a stake in an unlisted company increases the demand for a good governance framework.

Positive corporate governance changes have the impact of improving access to investment, allowing the company’s to access facilities of equity and debt. There has also been the additional impact of helping the company position itself for an eventual exit, trade sale or IPO, as the changes help send a signal to the market about the company’s emphasis on good governance.

Corporate management is the general process of making decisions within a company. Corporate governance is the set of rules and practices that ensure that a corporation is serving all of its stakeholders. According to the Center for International Private Enterprise, “Successful development efforts demand a holistic approach, in which various programs and strategies are recognized for their important contributions to progress and prosperity. In this regard, linkages between corporate governance and development are crucial… Yet, corporate governance and development are strongly related. Just as good corporate governance contributes to the sustainable development prospects of countries, increased economic sustainability of nations and institutional reforms that come with it provide the necessary basis for improved governance in the public and private sector.

Alternatively, corporate governance failures can undermine development efforts by misallocating much needed capital and resources and developmental fall backs can reinforce weak governance in the private sector and undermine job and wealth creation.” Globalization of finance and trade has supported the widespread adherence to common underlying corporate governance principles. They are not always country-specific and have been applied in various and diverse emerging markets, adjusted for local regulations and business traditions.

Building a strong board of directors never seems to get easier. High-profile board failures, the boom in activist investing, and the disruptive forces of technology are only a few of the reasons effective board governance is becoming more important.

Start with oversight, a role of the board that, most directors would agree, is no longer its sole function. Directors are now required to engage more deeply on strategy, digital, M&A, risk, talent, IT, and even marketing. Factor in complexities relating to board composition, culture, and time spent not to mention social, ethical, and environmental responsibilities and the degree of difficulty is set to continue to rise.

Mark and I stipulated a few points to help CEO’s and board chairs, as well as executives and directors, build stronger boards, this guide synthesizes multiple areas to make quick sense of complex issues in corporate governance, while focusing on the areas that are essential for building a better board and ultimately a better company.

Corporate Management Development
Corporate management has changed over time as managers have acquired better tools for understanding the problems they face. Most corporate managers are able to quantify many of the issues they consider, in order to make the correct decision. Managers factor in costs, benefits and the uncertainty of projects they are considering.
A good corporate manager is someone who can perform sustainable functions within the company they work for, while either maximizing revenue or minimising cost, depending on the department. Since the principles of corporate management are so broad, there are often specific disciplines for different parts of a company. The way a sales team is managed differs from the way the accounting department is managed.

History of Corporate Governance
Corporate governance is a newer subject of study. In the past, many companies were run solely for the benefit of their managers or founders. A company might have outside shareholders, business partners and thousands of employees, but under older ideas of corporate governance, the company would pursue only the goals of their managers. Managers might choose to provide poor benefits for employees, knowing that these employees couldn’t find better opportunities. Managers might also pay themselves excessive salaries without paying attention to community standards with respect to such practices.

Rise of Corporate Governance
In recent years, many companies have become more conscious of the need for good corporate governance. As regulations have tightened, it has become more difficult for companies to exploit workers or harm the environment. In addition, changes in financial markets have made it harder for companies to harm their shareholders. A mismanaged company becomes vulnerable to being purchased by another firm, so managers tend to treat their shareholders better. An increased focus on sustainability as a business practice, not just an ethical position, has also affected corporate governance.

Measuring Corporate Management Success
Corporate management’s success can generally be measured in terms of numbers. If the department in question is meant to create a profit (for example, if the entity being measured is a retail store or a factory), a quantity like profit margin or return on investment can demonstrate that it is achieving its goals. For departments that don’t have such responsibility (like a shipping department, or an accounting group), many managers measure their results in terms of cost. If a department can accomplish the same functions and spend less money, then by this measure, it’s a success.

Integrating Corporate Management and Governance
In recent years, many management thinkers have tried to synthesize corporate management and corporate governance into a single discipline. Since corporate governance is meant to equitably distribute the results of good corporate management, they fit together naturally: the best situation for a company to be in is for it to have good governance and good management. Combining these can take a variety of forms, from giving workers representation in company management to pursuing more efficient manufacturing processes in order to cut costs and help the environment. The most effective companies combine these practices in a mutually reinforcing way.

Finally, we discussed one more topic that is very typical that is trust – trust is generally lacking when board members begin to develop back channels to line managers within the company. This can occur because the CEO hasn’t provided sufficient, timely information, but it can also happen because board members are excessively political and are pursuing agendas they don’t necessarily want the CEO to know about. If a board is healthy, the CEO provides sufficient information on time and trusts the board not to meddle in day-to-day operations. He or she also gives board members free access to people who can answer their questions, obviating the need for back channels.

Another common point of breakdown occurs when political factions develop on the board. Sometimes this happens because the CEO sees the board as an obstacle to be managed and encourages factions to develop, then plays them against one another. We used the example of Pan Am founder Juan Trippe who was famous for doing this. As early as 1939, the board forced him out of the CEO role, but he found ways to sufficiently terrorize the senior managers at the company and one group of board members that he was returned to office. When he was fired again following huge cost overruns on the Boeing 747 the company underwrote, he coerced the directors into naming a successor who was terminally ill.

Most CEOs aren’t as manipulative as Trippe, and in fact, they’re often frustrated by divisive, seemingly intractable cliques that develop on boards. Failing to neutralize such factions can be fatal. Several members of Jim Robinson’s American Express board were willing to provide the advice, support, and linkage he needed — but the board was also riddled with complex political agendas. Eventually the visionary CEO was pushed out during a business downturn by a former chairman who wanted to reclaim the throne and a former top executive of another company who many felt simply missed the limelight.

The CEO, the chairman, and other board members can take steps to create a climate of respect, trust, and candor. First and most important, CEOs can build trust by distributing reports on time and sharing difficult information openly. In addition, they can break down factions by splitting up political allies when assigning members to activities such as site visits, external meetings, and research projects. It’s also useful to poll individual board members occasionally: an anonymous survey can uncover whether factions are forming or if members are uncomfortable with an autocratic CEO or chairman. Other revelations may include board members’ distrust of outside auditors, internal company reports, or management’s competence. These polls can be administered by outside consultants, the lead director, or professional staff from the company.

The Rt Hon David Blunkett, Home Secretary, London made a great statement once, when he said;

“Business continuity and planning is just as important for small companies as it is for large corporations. Plans need to be simple but effective, comprehensive but tailored to the needs of the organisation. Employers have a responsibility to their staff for their safety and security, and we all share the desire to ensure that any disaster or incident – whether natural or otherwise – has a minimal effect on the economic well-being of the country.”

If you can tweet you can become president…

I was recently having a fascinating discussion with a CEO of a technology company around leadership, the weaknesses and social media as the communication link to their image, when the recently elected president of the United States of America came to mind.
It’s bizarre really, but the facts are: Donald Trump is the first Twitter president of the United States of America.

In an interview with Tucker Carlson of Fox News recently, Trump put into words what many people have long been suspecting, that were it not for his mastery of hyperbole in 140 characters, he would not now be occupying the most powerful office on Earth. “Let me tell you about Twitter,” the president began. “I think that maybe I wouldn’t be here if it wasn’t for Twitter.”
Combine together his followers on Twitter and Facebook, Instagram, @Potus and “lots of other things”, Trump said, and he has the combined ability to publish directly to as many as 100 million people.

All jokes aside, whilst the truth maybe the fact that Twitter, Facebook, Instragram @Potus and other platforms may attract his following of interested fans, the question you need to ask yourself is exactly what cost is his presidency costing the United States just as you could question a CEO of a FTSE 100 company that used Social Media to obtain his or her position in the same?

My company is often being approached by executive boards of companies that question their existing leadership decisions in people, it is clear that people love the title of CEO, but do they have or are able to execute the skills to the business that will make the change necessary to drive the company to profitability and growth?

If we take a look at some basic facts:
• We are in the worst economic circumstances we have faced in almost 100 years
• It is forecasted to get worse before we hit bottom
• There are many organizations who have already executed large scale reductions in force and they will be followed by others
• Layoffs, reductions in force, or whatever you want to call them cause anxiety, trauma and lost productivity

Here are some of the facts about poor leadership costing a loss in productivity to American businesses that I found out in an article published at Harvard Business Review

According to one of the workplace reports by Gallup, 50% of the working professionals in US merely put their time in at office, 20% often represent their discontent via missings their days on job, driving customers away or influencing the co-workers in a negative way. Only the remaining 30% are committed towards their work. What’s the reason behind it? ‘poor leadership’.

In fact, while researching for their book ‘Leading People’, the authors Rosen and Brown came up with the findings that the current state of poor leadership is costing more than half of their human potential to the American companies.

The numbers are self-explanatory as to how much does poor leadership cost a business in terms of productivity.

Loss of human resources
Loss of human resources does not only mean the employees leaving the organisation. Well, that’s the ultimate loss, but a big loss is when the employees are not being used as per their full potential.

Poor resource management is one of the key tell tales of weak leadership, that can bring a downfall for the company. No matter how experienced and expert your resources are, if they are not utilised rightfully they are not going to benefit the business. This will ultimately lead to loss of resources, more so it will bring the loss of your company.

Successful leadership is all about having the right people, with the right abilities, in the right place, at the right time!

Loss of revenues
According to the same report by Gallup that was mentioned in the second point it has been found that poor leadership alone costs American companies a loss of more than half a trillion dollar each year.

According to the Cost of Poor Leadership Calculator created by DDI, a leading firm that conducts corporate researches, it was found out that one poor leader costs leadership around $126,000 over just one year owing to loss of productivity, and employee turnover issues.

Corporations are victims of the great training robbery. American companies spend enormous amounts of money on employee training and education $160 billion in the United States and close to $356 billion globally in 2015 alone, but they are not getting a good return on their investment. For the most part, the learning doesn’t lead to better organisational performance, because people soon revert to their old ways of doing things.

In another survey The Conference Board CEO Challenge®, more than 1,000 respondents indicated that human capital remains their top challenge, with customer relationships rising in importance in the past two years. Also, operational excellence and innovation remain vitally important for driving business growth and ensuring a sustainable future. These challenges, albeit in varying order, were the top challenges in all four regions included in the survey: the United States, Latin America, Europe, and Asia.

When asked about the strategies to address the human capital challenge, 4 of the top 10 strategies CEOs selected are focused on leadership: improve leadership development programs, enhance the effectiveness of senior management teams, improve the effectiveness of frontline supervisors and managers, and improve succession planning. CEOs know their organisations cannot retain highly engaged, high-performing employees without effective leaders who can manage, coach, develop, and inspire their multigenerational, globally dispersed, and tech-savvy teams.

CEOs also were asked to identify the leadership attributes and behaviors most critical to success as a leader. The top five prominent in every region globally were:
• Retaining and developing talent.
• Managing complexity.
• Leading change.
• Leading with integrity.
• Having an entrepreneurial mind-set.

So how can leadership improve?
First, leadership capability efforts are not necessarily hardwired to business strategy. This will always lead to initiatives that are disconnected and inconsistent across the organisation, diluting the overall focus on the core leadership behaviors to cultural and business change.

Without properly aligning current leadership capability against business goals, you miss the opportunity to identify key gaps, running the risk of focusing on the wrong things.

Second, almost all of the focus is on quality of content; how well we execute takes a back seat. This becomes even more difficult when you are trying to scale efforts across the enterprise or across different countries and cultures. According to the Corporate Leadership Council, one-third of a leadership program’s success is related to content and two-thirds are determined by the quality of the implementation.

Finally, despite the best of intentions, many efforts produce no lasting change in terms of behavior and results. Don’t be drawn in by the hype of five-minute videos and digitized options. This type of learning can be engaging, but like a quick-fix diet, they don’t work.
Failure to examine the big data and analytics to help understand (and react to) the gap between existing leadership practices and proven value to the business is a detriment to leadership development efforts. Too often we are still content with the smile sheets and anecdotal data. To be effective, we all need data-driven analyses to execute informed decision-making processes and in real time.

This video on Leadership in the 21st Century and Global Forces by Dominic Barton, Global Managing Partner of McKinsey & Company, will give you another prospective to global and growing trends in ‘Global Leadership’ – The Darden Leadership Speaker Series kicks-off its 2016-17 season with Dominic Barton.

Talking with my business partner in the US, Mark Herbert, we created a check list of priorities that should be considered when making change, which include:
• Leadership development has long been viewed as a cost. It is an investment in your leaders and your business.
• The program is not adopted across the enterprise. If you do not predict and act on issues across geographies and cultures, there will be no consistency and implementation will not succeed.
• Development is seen as an isolated training event or the “initiative of the month.” That’s ineffective if you’re trying to achieve lasting behavior and change. Reinforce learning and sustain the momentum by investing energy and resources to diagnose your leaders and guide them through a targeted journey of experiences.

Marcus Buckingham, author of ‘First Break All the Rules’ and other management “bibles” stated:

“Today’s most respected and successful leaders are able to transform fear of the unknown into clear visions of whom to serve, core strengths to leverage and actions to take. They enable us to pierce the veil of complexity and identify the single best vantage point from which to examine our complex roles. Only then can we take clear, decisive action.”

Wimbledon Gentleman Matthew Benwell and Editor at Wimbledon Gent Interviews Geoff Hudson-Searle

Talking Business with Geoff Hudson-Searle

The modern Gent likes to be seen as an approachable man who embraces new trends and feels confident in what he does. Business is a way of life and something that is a part of him but does not define him. The entrepreneurial streak reflects his opportunistic vision on life and that all things can be achieved.

One man who encapsulates all that is Gent about the modern entrepreneur is Geoff Hudson-Searle. I had the pleasure of working with Geoff a number of years in a different guise and was impressed with his natural charm and effortless relaxed approach to work. Since then, Geoff has written a book about the art of communicating at work and in the modern world in general entitled “Meaningful Conversations”.

I was a little apprehensive at first as business guides, I have always felt, are rather American in their outlook. I feel that, quite often, they are only relevant to the experiences of the writer and are a collection of power-phrases and long winded, overly complex explanations.

“Meaningful Conversations” is a simple and actually enjoyable read. One of its main deviations from the norm is that it is split into short, sharp chapters making concise and relevant points. The book does not also have that preachy quality which one usually associates with business guides. The relevance of the book is all –encapsulating to whatever level you feel you are at in the business world. It gives simple advice to the soul trader as well as the corporate employee looking for meaning. I hate to say it, I genuinely found the book to be a pleasant experience which covered not just an outlook to the modern business world but to life in general.

Having read the book Geoff kindly took time out to have a chat with me:

WG: Hi Geoff, thanks for meeting with me. Obviously our focus here is on SW London. What is your connection to SW London?

GHS: I have always lived in South West London, spending the majority of my time in Wimbledon Village, Barnes and now Chiswick Park. You will still often see me in the Village at the Ivy Cafe reminiscing and writing those special experiences, those memorable stories from our past and foresight’s for the future, that will always contain the line ‘and as it all happened or as it is going to happen’

WG: In a world full of business guides, especially in the American market, what do you feel separates yours from that field?

GHS: Many business books in the open market discuss what makes the author so successful at their accomplishment, “Meaningful Conversations” across 54 short chapters demonstrates the relationship between communications (human 2 human, human 2 technology, human 2 bot and robot), strategy and business development and growth. Readers will gain insights into topical subjects, components of Communications, Strategy and Business Development and Growth, including a wide range of tips, models and techniques that will help to build strong and effective solutions in today’s business world. It is important to understand that a number of the ideas, developments and techniques employed at the beginning as well as the top of a business can be successfully made flexible to apply the terms ‘Communications’, Strategy’ and Business Development and Growth’ not least forgetting the fact that these have become overused during the last decade and have become devalued as a result. In my book I aim to simplify these terms and to re-value management and leadership by addressing topics and subjects in each distinctive chapter. This book provides a holistic overview of the essential leading methods of techniques. It will provide you with a hands-on guide for everyone across business and life.

WG: For me I was surprised about the holistic approach you take in some of your writing. This is surely a clean break from the traditional, almost stuffy, image of business. What took you down that path?

GHS: The idea for the name “Meaningful Conversations” came to me because to some extent or other all of us carry a reflection of the experiences of our lives. However, whether and how we succeed is determined at least in part by how we cope with those experiences and what we learn from them. The only exception is that nobody has ever written transparently across the highly complex world in which we live and operate within our business and personal life’s, people try to divide their lives, but the reality is we only have one life. I would want the reader to walk away with determination to never, never give up on the dream. The dream becomes reality and you are the master of that journey.

WG: In the modern world of social media and whatsapp, do you feel that communication on a face-to-face level is something of a lost art?

GHS: Social technologies have broken the barriers of space and time, enabling us to interact 24/7 with more people than ever before. But like any revolutionary concept, it has spawned a set of new barriers and threats. In an ironic twist, social media has the potential to make us less social; a surrogate for the real thing. For it to be a truly effective communication vehicle, all parties bear a responsibility to be genuine, accurate, and not allow it to replace human contact altogether. I think the answer to a balanced life is to have human 2 human and creative time, send flowers, write cards, poetry, read real books, integrated with email, social media and collaboration tools. What ever happened to picking up the phone, or talking to someone face-to-face over coffee, I guess we do we not have time.

WG: Finally, what inspired you to write this book?

GHS: I started as a writer with a non-fiction, “Freedom after the Sharks”, and “Meaningful Conversations” was always to be a fiction. The book deals with the constant root cause of today’s plethora of life and business challenges. It explores the why’s and wherefores of communications, strategy and development and growth in our ways of thinking and experiencing the world, and then uncovers a way ahead through 54 short stories backed by research from MIT, Harvard, Stamford, Oxford and Cambridge. It draws upon Eastern and Western wisdom and blends philosophy with pioneering new thought. Are you up for crossing the threshold? In “Meaningful Conversations” you will find the answers to our most pressing challenges in business and life.

WG: Thank you for your time Geoff

So there you have it; an interesting and thoroughly thought-provoking take on he modern world of business. If you want to buy “Meaningful Conversations”, it is available via Amazon, Apple, Google Play, Nook, Kodo, Smashwords, Waterstones, Barnes and Noble in hardback, paperback, kindle, e-book and direct from the publisher via Matador.

You can see more of Geoff’s work at hsbusinessmanagement.com and his book at meaningfulconversationsbook.com you can also follow him on twitter: @GeoffHSearle

Should there be more female gender directors on company boards?

women BoD 3Most people agree that there are not enough women in corporate boardrooms, but there is little consensus on the best way to increase numbers and improve director diversity. Some countries use voluntary targets, while others employ tougher (often controversial) legislative measures such as binding quotas to tackle the problem.

The final report from Lord Mervyn Davies, who has championed gender equality in the boardroom, will show that FTSE 100 companies have met the target of having 25% women on their boards – double the number in 2011 when the target was set. Then, just 135 of 1,076 (12.5%) FTSE 100 directorships were held by women.

Davies, a former trade minister and chairman of Standard Chartered bank, will set a new target of 33% female board members by 2020 and widen the scope to all FTSE 350 firms. But he says the introduction of legally enforced quotas is unwarranted as the progress so far proves that the voluntary approach is working.

In Europe, binding gender quotas are increasingly prevalent. In March 2015, Germany became the latest European country to make quotas mandatory. Starting in 2016, major German companies will need to fill 30 percent of non-executive board seats with women. Germany follows in the footsteps of other European countries such as Norway, Italy, France, and Spain in instituting such a policy.

As corporate governance rises up the agenda, gender inequality in global boardrooms and a lack of diversity in senior decision-making is getting more scrutiny from the public and stakeholders.

Facts show that the glittering prizes are falling to women. General Motors, IBM, PepsiCo, Lockheed Martin and DuPont are among a couple of dozen giant American companies with female bosses. Oxford University is about to follow the footsteps of Harvard and appoint its first female leader; and next year the United States may elect its first woman president. Women still have an enormous way to go: the New York Times points out that more big American firms are run by men called John than by women. But the trend is clear: women now make up more than 50% of university graduates and of new hires by big employers.

women BoD 4Will this growing cadre of female bosses manage any differently from men? Forty years ago feminists would have found the very question demeaning. Pioneers such as Margaret Thatcher argued that women could and would do the same job as men, if given a chance. But today some management scholars argue that women excel in the leadership qualities most valued in modern firms.

McKinsey produced a 2007 and 2008 study, the consulting firm found that five “leadership behaviours” are seen in women more frequently than in men: people-development; setting expectations and rewards; providing role models; giving inspiration; and participative decision-making. It argued that such behaviours are particularly valuable in today’s less-hierarchical companies. By contrast, the two that men were found to adopt more often than women sound rather old-fashioned: control and corrective action; and individualistic decision-making.

Those who say women are better suited to taking charge of today’s companies also lean on two other arguments. The first is that women are better at “androgynous” management—that is, combining supposedly “male” and “female” characteristics into a powerful mixture.

This is particularly valuable in businesses undergoing great upheaval, which need a combination of command-and-control and caring-and-sharing. The second is that women differ from men not so much in their leadership styles as in the values that they bring to the job. They are much more influenced by compassion and fairness than men.

Campaigners are quick to point out that only 8pc of FTSE 100 directors are women. This statistic is the crux of their argument for quotas to lift the number of female board members. But their campaign misses a particularly pertinent point: 92pc of directors are men. In 2015, despite all the lobbying and proposed quotas, it is men rather than women who will decide the future of equality in the boardroom.

So, if men still have the balance of power, why will women win the argument?

Future leaders will realise that a perfect process doesn’t guarantee success. The best companies employ the best people, then give them the freedom to follow their initiative. Once it becomes clear that the only way to create a great company is to employ great people, the smart top men will realise that lots of “the best men for the job” are women.

The idea of hiring only the very best (people who rate nine or 10 out of 10) doesn’t just apply to the boardroom – having great people throughout the organisation, from shop floor to the top tier is a magic formula for success. Putting high-achieving women into the heart of middle management is much more powerful than board quotas. Promoting proven talent will ensure that women occupy more places round their board table.

Another big factor is flexible working. Within the next century I am sure we will be bemused by the concept of a five-day week. With broadband, email, Skype, tablets and another half-century of technological change, most office workers will seldom need to go near the office. They will be able to do their job where, how and whenever they want. A world full of flexible workers will be a big boost for women who want to fit work around their family. After a time, men will also see how they can fit work into their life instead of having to fit their life around work.

The prospect of a flexible working world makes it so much easier to employ the best people and, as a consequence, the best people will realise that work-life balance isn’t just management speak, it can become a reality.

So what is the answer, should we have a more balanced male/female gender board? Will it make any difference whether the board is balanced? Can a mixed board be the driver of better performance and a higher return to shareholders? I feel candidature should be measured on the best person with the credentials and qualifications for the role.

What is an Entrepreneur?

I have many discussions with my business partner in the US over entrepreneurs and cross border challenges, the entrepreneur and his/ her role to the business community and have seen lots of definitions for what makes an entrepreneur over the years but I read an article recently that is quite compelling over exactly what is an entrepreneur. It comes from Chris Oakley OBE, chairman of web design company Chapter Eight. He is also a former journalist who in 1991 led what was then the world’s largest media management buy-out, the £120m acquisition of regional newspapers based in and around Birmingham and Coventry.

So what is an entrepreneur?

“An entrepreneur sees an opportunity which others do not fully recognise, to meet an unsatisfied demand or to radically improve the performance of an existing business. They have unquenchable self-belief that this opportunity can be made real through hard work, commitment and the adaptability to learn the lessons of the market along the way.”

“They are not diverted or discouraged by scepticism from ‘experts’ or from those from whom they seek backing and support, but willing to weigh all advice and select that which will be helpful. They are prepared not just to work seriously hard but to back their judgment with personal investment at a level which will cause problems if they are wrong about the opportunity. They understand that achievements are the result of team work and knows how to choose the necessary blend of talents and inspire them with their vision.”

Interesting enough a study from The Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology compared the health of a “nationally representative sample of employees and entrepreneurs” and examined a wide range of health factors for both groups. This included the rates of physical disease and mental illness, blood pressure, the number of sick days taken, the number of visits to the physician, and overall well–being and life satisfaction.

After the numbers were crunched, entrepreneurs were the clear winner in essentially every category. It was discovered that entrepreneurs showed significantly lower incidence of physical and mental illnesses, lower blood pressure, lower rates of hypertension, made fewer visits to the hospital, and enjoyed higher overall well–being and life satisfaction.

What I believe makes most entrepreneurs healthy is not the fact that they run a business, but that they approach life in a particular way. In other words, it’s their healthy mind-set that often leads to a healthy life. For example…

  • Entrepreneurs give themselves permission to change the world and to pursue their dreams.
  • Entrepreneurs believe in themselves and in the control they have over their own lives.
  • Entrepreneurs trust that, even when things are uncertain, they’ll figure it out.
  • Entrepreneurs wake up with a purpose that drives them. They have a vision of what they are working towards that pulls them out of bed each day.

The feelings of empowerment and self–confidence that come from entrepreneurship find their way into virtually every area of your life.

I do not think entrepreneurship is for everyone, but I also do not think it needs to be.

Being an entrepreneur requires much more than just big ideas. A true entrepreneur is a rare breed; it is someone who possesses a unique combination of traits, skills and characteristics that enable them to beat the odds and go after their dreams full throttle.

What are those attributes? What does an entrepreneur need to succeed?

Goal-orientated

Entrepreneurs are all about setting goals and putting their all into achieving them; they are determined to make their business succeed and will remove any encumbrances that may stand in their way. They also tend to be strategic in their game plans and always have a clear idea in mind of exactly what they want to achieve and how they plan to achieve it.

Committed to their business

Entrepreneurs are not easily defeated; they view failure as an opportunity for future success, and if they do not succeed the first time, they will stay committed to their business and will continue to try and try again until it does succeed. A true entrepreneur doesn’t take ‘no’ for an answer.

Hands-on

Entrepreneurs are inherently proactive, and know that if something really needs to get done, they should do it themselves. They are certainly ‘doers’, not thinkers, and tend to have very exacting standards. They view their business as an extension of themselves and like to be integral in its day-to-day operations—even when they don’t have to be.

Thrive on uncertainty

Not only do they thrive on it—they also remain calm throughout it. Sometimes things go wrong in business, but when you’re at the helm of a company and making all the decisions, it’s essential to keep your cool in any given situation. True entrepreneurs know this and secretly flourish and grow in the wake of any challenges.

Continuously look for opportunities to improve

Entrepreneurs realize that every event or situation is a business opportunity, and they are constantly generating new and innovative ideas. They have the ability to look at everything around them and focus it toward their goals in an effort to improve their business.

Willing to take risks

A true entrepreneur does not ask questions about whether or not they will succeed—they truly believe they will. They exude this confidence in all aspects of life, and as a bi-product, they are never afraid to take risks due to their unbinding faith that ultimately they will triumph.

Willing to listen and learn

The most important part of learning is listening—and a good entrepreneur will do this in abundance.

Great people skills

Entrepreneurs have strong communication skills, and it is this strength that enables them to effectively sell their product or service to clients and customers. They’re also natural leaders with the ability to motivate, inspire and influence those around them.

Inherently creative

This is one trait that, due to their very nature, entrepreneurial business people have by the bucket load. They are able to not only come up with ingenious ideas, but also turn those ideas into profits.

Passionate and always full of positivity

Passion is perhaps the most important trait of the successful entrepreneur. They genuinely love their job and are willing to put in those extra hours to make their business grow; they get a genuine sense of pleasure from their work that goes way beyond just cash.

Very few people in my opinion are fortunate enough to be born with all of these characteristics, but the good news is that they can all be learned. You should read a copy of my book before you start, ‘Freedom after the Sharks’, despite a difficult family life and professional setbacks, I developed the determination, drive and skills to create a successful business and happy life. Freedom after the Sharks shows how, even in a declining economy, a business can survive and even succeed.

If you want to be an entrepreneur someday, here is an equation you should print out and attach to computer screen, smartphone, office wall:

Entrepreneur + Capital = Products + Customers = Business.

Evan Spiegel is the CEO of Snapchat. That is his job. It is a real company with a real product, real employees, and real investors. And I bet what he really identifies with is the cool ephemeral messaging app the company he co-founded came up with. Which is how they managed to attract hundreds of millions of extremely engaged users and raise more than half a billion dollars in venture funding.

John Mackey is co-CEO of Whole Foods. Healthy food has always been his passion but the way he built his company – to serve all its major stakeholders – is unique. He wrote a book about it called Conscious Capitalism. I seriously doubt if Mackey thinks of himself as a great entrepreneur but as the co-founder of a great company that showed the world a new and better way to do business.

The concluding statement I would like to leave you with is:  “employees are far removed from entrepreneurship in fact a paradigm shift away, most employees would never dream of taking a risk on their own abilities, a risk in their personal security or taking people on a journey that stretched far beyond their imagination, entrepreneurship is not for everyone but can be very rewarding for the few”. A quote from my book by Maya Angelou “ I’ve learned that making a living is not the same thing as making a life”

Do we know what we want?

2014-09-13-looking_at_ocean_thumb (1)I have been discussing the subject deeply with a very good friend of mine, ‘do people actually know what they want, the subject is actually deeper, do we know our life purpose?

“Know thyself” has been a dictate since the time of the ancient Greeks, but Thoreau’s statement speaks to the difficulty of such a task. As it turns out, there are some things about ourselves that are very hard to perceive accurately. In some instances, others know us better than we know ourselves

Everybody wants what feels good. Everyone wants to live a carefree, happy and easy life, to fall in love and have amazing sex and relationships, to look perfect and make money and be popular and well-respected and admired and a total baller to the point that people part like the Red Sea when you walk into the room.

If I ask you, “What do you want out of life?” and you say something like, “I want to be happy and have a great family and a job I like,” it’s so ubiquitous that it doesn’t even mean anything.

Everybody wants to have an amazing job and financial independence but not everyone wants to suffer through 60-hour work weeks, long commutes, obnoxious paperwork, to navigate arbitrary corporate hierarchies and the blasé confines of an infinite cubicle hell. People want to be rich without the risk, without the sacrifice, without the delayed gratification necessary to accumulate wealth.

Everybody wants to have great sex and an awesome relationship  but not everyone is willing to go through the tough conversations, the awkward silences, the hurt feelings and the emotional psychodrama to get there. And so they settle. They settle and wonder “What if?” for years and years and until the question morphs from “What if?” into “Was that it?” And when the lawyers go home and the alimony check is in the mail they say, “What was that for?” if not for their lowered standards and expectations 20 years prior, then what for?

Because happiness requires struggle. The positive is the side effect of handling the negative. You can only avoid negative experiences for so long before they come roaring back to life.

24007-life-without-purpose-is-like-a-body-without-soulPeople want to start their own business or become financially independent. But you don’t end up a successful entrepreneur unless you find a way to appreciate the risk, the uncertainty, the repeated failures, and working insane hours on something you have no idea whether will be successful or not.

People want a partner, a spouse. But you don’t end up attracting someone amazing without appreciating the emotional turbulence that comes with weathering rejections, building the sexual tension that never gets released, and staring blankly at a phone that never rings. It’s part of the game of love. You can’t win if you don’t play.

What determines your success isn’t “What do you want to enjoy?” The question is, “What pain do you want to sustain?” The quality of your life is not determined by the quality of your positive experiences but the quality of your negative experiences. And to get good at dealing with negative experiences is to get good at dealing with life.

There is a great quote by Marla Gibbs “I truly believe that everything that we do and everyone that we meet is put in our path for a purpose. There are no accidents; we’re all teachers – if we’re willing to pay attention to the lessons we learn, trust our positive instincts and not be afraid to take risks or wait for some miracle to come knocking at our door

I think most people retain at least a glimmer of awareness of their life’s purpose within their inner being. It often feels like a leaning, an inclination, that continues to pull at you. Sometimes is right in front of your eyes but you don’t allow yourself to see it, like when you’re hunting for your missing keys and then discover that they’ve been right in front of you the whole time. For example, an investment advisor found himself doing more and more work with charity organisations. He finally realised that what he felt most in sync with was hands-on work helping people. That was the part he enjoyed about his work, not the money managing per se. Helping people was his true calling, and it was staring him in the face the whole time.

Those who experience a clear inclination but don’t pursue or fulfil it remain incomplete and dissatisfied. But it’s important not to confuse seeking happiness with finding your purpose. Happiness is what you experience in the daily flow of life the highs and lows that are the situation. They will fluctuate. But purpose is deeper. It’s more of an underlying sense of peace and fulfilment overall, a sense of integration and continuous unfoldment of your being. It transcends everyday ups and downs, the disappointments or successes, even. When you’re living in accordance with your life’s purpose, you view all of the above as part of what you encounter along the road. They don’t distract you from that larger vision, your ideal, which is like a magnet steadily pulling you towards it

In the end, figuring out what you want and your life purpose isn’t an easy process and no miraculous  solution exists for doing it. The fact is, you need to think about it, and to do so you might need to push yourself through some mental challenges until you figure out exactly what is you’ve been looking for, and just maybe your life purpose will find you.

Finally, be careful what your dream for, it may just arrive into your life!

The Stock Exchange and Dating, is there a difference?

stock exchange hft caseLike many things in this world, relationships form complex systems that are difficult to understand and almost impossible to predict.

However, there are general guidelines to complex systems that we can apply to relationships to make them easier for our simple minds to grasp.

The stock market is one of the more popular complex systems today, which we can use for this purpose.

Monitoring  behaviours, movements and roles that occur in the stock market, we may be able to better understand why we are attracted to certain types of people, why certain people are attracted to us, how we can improve our strategies and who we are, hypothetically, best suited for in varying life circumstances.

We might even forecast with a certain degree of certainty the messy trajectory of our all-too-human hearts.

cartoon stock exchange datingIn each relationship, one person is predominantly the Investor while the other is predominantly the Stock. While both are investing in each other in some way, to a certain degree, the Investor has more to lose than the Stock.

Likewise, while both are proving their value to each other in some way, the Stock has more to prove than the Investor.

In general you are the Investor if you are more attracted to people based on their ability keep up with you and/or make you look better. You are the Stock if you are more attracted to people who have the ability to support you, better you or otherwise believe in you.

It is neither better nor worse to be the Investor or the Stock because both roles come with their own set of advantages and disadvantages. You play these roles based on the cards life has dealt you and what you have done with them so far.

Stocks and Investors can morph into different types and even switch or play dual roles simultaneously throughout their lifetimes.

The success of each relationship primarily hinges on market circumstances when an Investor decides to invest in a certain type of Stock.

Disturbing environments breed disturbing relationships, smart environments breed smart relationships, unnatural environments breed unnatural relationships, rich environments breed rich relationships, lazy environments breed lazy relationships.

“Investors” put their money into stocks, real estate, etc., under the assumption that over time, the underlying investment will increase in value, and the investment will be profitable.

Typically, investors do not have a plan for what to do if the investment decreases in value. They hold onto the investment in hopes it will bounce back and again become a winner.

Investors anticipate declining markets with fear and anxiety, but usually do not plan ahead of time how they will respond to them. When faced with a declining (bear) market, they hold their positions and continue to lose.

We all know investors. In many cases it was us before we realized how dangerous buy-and-hold investing can be to our savings.

Investors do have some knowledge of trading. But that knowledge is tainted by how it is all too often described in the financial press. “Trading” is risky, dangerous, foolish, bad, involves a great deal of work, etc. On the other hand “investing” is good, reliable and safe.

“2000-2002 Nasdaq Bear market – It will take a 250% gain to make up the losses in Nasdaq investments”

Investors had a taste of what “buy-and-hold” can do to their capital in the recent 2000-2002 bear market. But many do not realize just how far in the hole that bear market put them. The S&P 500 declined 50% and the Nasdaq declined 80%. How easy is it for the markets to regain those losses?

It will take a 100% gain to make up the losses for those invested in in the S&P. It will take a 250% gain to make up the losses in Nasdaq investments. When a powerful advance is measured in 20% to 30% moves, you can easily see how long it will take to regain those huge losses.

In the last several years of market gains, we have come nowhere near accomplishing this in the typical index fund. It is likely to take investors many more years to get back just to where they were in 2000.

Relationships are powerful. Our one-to-one connections with each other are the foundation for change. And building relationships with people from different cultures, often many different cultures, is key in building diverse communities that are powerful enough to achieve significant goals.

It is our connection to each other that gives meaning to our lives. Our caring for each other is often what motivates us to make change. And establishing connections with people from diverse backgrounds can be key in making significant changes in our communities.

As individuals, and in groups, we can change our communities. We can set up neighborhoods and institutions in which people commit themselves to working to form strong relationships and alliances with people of diverse cultures and backgrounds. We can establish networks and coalitions in which people are knowledgeable about each other’s struggles, and are willing to lend a hand.

Technology and The Internet of Things (IoT) is an amazing innovation. But even as it’s shrunk the world and brought us closer together, it’s threatened to push us further apart. Like any useful technology innovation, to make technology serve us well requires the exercise of good judgment.

Is Strategy within Digital Transformation Important?

business-social-transformationI have been invited to a very interesting conference next week called, Enterprise Digital Summit London the conference is aimed at digital transformation and driving business value with digital and social collaboration. The event is focused on business process and ROI aimed at people in business who want to find out how, as well as to listen from experienced practitioners and consultants.

The event will take place on Thursday 22nd October at The British Academy for the humanities and social sciences, 10-11 Carlton House Terrace and the speakers include Stowe Boyd (Gigaom Research) other speakers include Professor Vlatka Hlupic (Westminster University and author of The Management Shift), Stanley Awaku (Vodafone), David D’Souza (CIPD), Kim England (Pearson plc), Belinda Gannaway (Belinda Gannaway Consulting Ltd),  Björn Negelmann (Kongress Media).

This week’s Monday blog, I thought I would focus on some of the topics from the conference and provide some tips, advise and thought leadership on the following:

What are the strategic building blocks for Digital Transformation?

One of the greatest challenges for managers is persuading senior leaders to more fully embrace digital within their organisations. Many managers have a good idea about what they want to do, but need to argue or build the business case internally in order to receive funding. In many cases, this is the major barrier to moving towards digital transformation.

In those organisations where digital is not given much prominence, it is usually because the business has not yet been affected by a real negative impact on their revenues because of digital. Leadership teams have been forced to look holistically at their organisation and consider where digital can play a major role in improving performance.

In organisations where this is not a problem, digital is likely to be either a key revenue stream, an operational necessity or a key differentiator, so digital is the key part of the overall business strategy.

blog post 5 Oct 2015In both instances, it is imperative to have a clearly informed business case that helps position how digital can closely align with the goals of the business, and not on digital trends and fashions.

Barriers to adoption of a digital strategy

What will it take to break down the barriers to digital engagement, so that organisational leaders and other senior professionals will commit themselves to digital transformation? First and foremost, they have to make a mental shift, to recognise that it’s actually in their best interests to give serious consideration to how they and their organisations must adapt to Digital Era realities in significant ways.

Getting to the tipping point, when digital engagement and transformation are considered the norm, is going to take:

Time- Change of this magnitude is going to be slow, especially in industries and organisations where there is not much precedent for the potential value that new technologies and ways of working can offer. It will take time to shift perceptions of Digital Era technologies from novelties to utilities, and from short-term fads to long-term trends.

Increased media exposure – A year ago, little was written in the mainstream press about topics like digital currency and cybersecurity. More recently, ideas like digital transformation and cognition as a service are still being introduced. The more subjects like these move from technical and niche publications to more widely-read outlets, the more likely their importance and implications will be understood.

Education and training – Both formal and informal approaches to learning – especially programs targeted to leaders and experienced professionals – will help accelerate the necessary shifts in knowledge and understanding, and ultimately behavior. Academic institutions, private service providers, and employers themselves need to make digital literacy a strategic imperative for workers at all levels in a all types of roles.

Relatable market leaders – The more examples there are of organizations that have successfully undertaken digital engagement and transformation initiatives, the less resistant later adopters are likely to be. These examples have to come not just from the consumer space, but also in business-to-business enterprises, the public sector, higher education, non-profit organisations, and more. As we emerge from the economic doldrums we’ve been in for years, organizations with stronger appetites for risk will take chances and start to reap visible rewards. When they do, others will start to follow.

Driving employee engagement

Employee engagement is the key to business success. It is the result of the psychological contract plus the experience that exists between employee and employer. The foundation of employee engagement is respect, trust, and performance. Engagement is dynamic because it changes over the course of an employee’s tenure at a workplace and overall career as a consequence of multiple events and factors.

Engagement is intrinsic and individual. In conclusion, engagement is all about “I.” It is a voluntary connection to the business and to its purpose; it includes an emotional component to the workplace in order to achieve its desired outcomes.

Employees decide if they want to be engaged. Thus, even though employee engagement entails an emotional connection, it also involves a rational component as the employee decides whether or not to be engaged given her individual circumstances. We have concluded that, even though many workplaces may seem to be similar, they are as unique as the individuals who belong to them, which in turn affects what it means for employees to be engaged with the organisation.

As you may expect, the definitions and explanations of employee engagement are as varied as the authors who have proposed them; however, they have some similarities. These definitions include emotional, rational, and practical features that are connected to engagement’s impact on businesses as well as on employees. In general, these definitions refer to engagement as voluntary. Each well-known definition includes these important components; in addition, there are other factors that contribute to move employee engagement in a particular direction. These factors are typically known as drivers of engagement.

Driving ROI

The benefits to strategic planning are intangible and show hard bottom-line return on investment (ROI). Every day, your work impacts aspects of your business. Following these tips can help you realise the true day-to-day impact of having a strategic plan in place:

Spend more time on high-impact, high-growth activities. These activities are where you want to spend as much time as possible. With these maneuvers, you spend less time going around in circles.

Identify true opportunities versus false starts. If you know what you’re best at and where you want to go, you can more quickly identify true opportunities. Strategic planning helps you put the boundaries on your business. When you ignore extraneous distractions, you use your resources more effectively and more quickly to grow your organisation.

Internal advancement, such as in your career as a leader, can come from being involved in strategy development and using it as a true guide to your work.

Achieve your vision for success. You started your organisation for a reason. You likely have a vision for your business. If you want to achieve your vision for success, you have to specifically figure out how you’re going to get there. Having a strategic plan makes success intentional.

Increase employee commitment. Strategic planning increases employee commitment — especially in this tight labour market. Helping your employees see the vision that you have for success and growth helps you work toward that goal.

Culture change and leadership required to transform

Changing an organisation’s culture is one of the most difficult leadership challenges. That is because an organisation’s culture comprises an interlocking set of goals, roles, processes, values, communications practices, attitudes and assumptions.

The elements fit together as an mutually reinforcing system and combine to prevent any attempt to change it. That’s why single-fix changes, such as the introduction of teams, or Lean, or Agile, or Scrum, or knowledge management, or some new process, may appear to make progress for a while, but eventually the interlocking elements of the organizational culture take over and the change is inexorably drawn back into the existing organizational culture.

Changing a culture is a large-scale undertaking, and eventually all of the organisational tools for changing minds will need to be put in play. However the order in which they deployed has a critical impact on the likelihood of success.

In general, the most fruitful success strategy is to begin with leadership tools, including a vision or story of the future, cement the change in place with management tools, such as role definitions, measurement and control systems, and use the pure power tools of coercion and punishments as a last resort, when all else fails.

I would welcome your comments on your management experiences.

To book your place on The Enterprise Digital Summit London, visit http://www.enterprise-digital.net/london.html

The thrill lies in the challenge

Sedona, AZI was recently asked to go fishing with some friends in Sedona, Arizona, on Grasshopper Creek. Apart from many interesting challenges, this is a beautiful creek in the Red Rock and one on the most beautiful destinations in the world.
So why exactly do people fish? Ask most anglers why they enjoy spending time in the outdoors and you’re likely to hear the word “freedom.” Spending a day afield casting for trout on a cool mountain stream or bobber fishing for bluegills on a pond helps to release us from our highly stressful, everyday environment. Nothing brings on the sense of being alive and helps to rebuild our personal reserves like a day spent interacting with nature.
Fishing has a way of fulfilling an age-old need of pursuing and catching. The thrill lies in the challenge, such as stalking an elusive wild trout or matching the hatch. But there are many who will be quick to profess that it’s not the catching of fish that’s important, but the immeasurable life lessons that you will experience along the way.

Fishing provides that connection with the living world. It gives you the opportunity of being totally immersed, turning back into yourself in a good way. A form of meditation, some form of communion with levels of yourself that are deeper than the ordinary self.

– Ted Hughes

My partners were Rob, a successful budding entrepreneur in the Internet world, Shafeeq, a successful director of medicine in Neurology and Electrodiagnostic disorders, and Jon, a senior partner in law for investments and securities.

fishing 1 750

They were my company on a two-day fishing experience. We discussed many subjects including innovation and strategy of new inventions and creativity. In summary we came up with what strategies you should be consider from an embryonic blank page to insight, which were:

1. Creativity
2. Mindset
3. Engage
4. Customer connected
5. Observe insights
6. Ask the right questions
7. Always challenge
8. Create a think tank

fishing 3 750

Rob mentioned one really cool business that was launched in 2010: Pulse, an elegant news reader. The app has been downloaded by more than 20 million people and stands as one of the original fifty apps in Apple’s App Store Hall of Fame. Interestingly enough, the founders got many things right:

  • They started with a ‘driven’ mindset and were not content to merely comply with the standard requirements of their graduate program.
  • They minimized planning and maximised action, interacting with customers immediately.
  • They prototyped quickly and cheaply, fueling thousands of variations that ultimately resulted in their wildly popular final product.
  • They thrived in spite of time constraints, investment and spurred on by necessity to constantly develop creative ideas at an accelerated pace.

What companies do you follow or admire based on culture, values and performance and why?