Search results for

"growth"

BlogTeam

The First Failure of Socialism

by Ron Potter

We have just finished Thanksgiving, or what we experience as Thanksgiving in this age of Covid.  It is a time, rightfully so, for each of us to talk about what we’re thankful for.  However, let’s not forget that the pilgrim settlement in plymouth in the early 1600s may be socialism’s first failure

Needs vs Work

In the settlement, all that was needed by individuals was provided from them, having been either produced or paid for by the collective-owned farms.  The “accounting” system was determined by what the individuals needed rather than how hard they worked or earned their way.

Discontent and Starvation

The strongest colonists who worked hard in the fields all day began to resent those that received the same amount for doing nothing while the able-bodied provided all of the hard work to supply the goods.  In addition to the discontent, nearly half of the colonists died during that first winter because too many people took advantage of the supplies provided by the few.

Nearly 400 years later, Margaret Thatcher, the Prime Minister of the UK said, “The trouble with socialism is that eventually, you run out of other people’s money.”

Socialism Abandoned

About two years after the famine brought on by the socialism approach, the pilgrims decided that enough was enough, a new approach was undertaken that required each family to provide for themselves.  It required hard work.

Work Application

If you’ve followed my blogs, you know that I’ve tried to stay away from politics for the most part.  So how do we look at our own and other’s failed attempts at socialism?

How does socialism disguise itself in the workplace?  It’s not all that hard to see.  Some people are there simply for the paycheck.  No motivation.  No extra effort.  No innovation.  Unfortunately, those people are left in place for various reasons even though it’s obvious to their colleagues and others they’re not pulling their weight.

What happens when that attitude is allowed to continue?  Other people either:

  • Begin to exhibit the same traits: “Why should I put in the extra effort, create my own motivation, look for innovative approaches when others are not and no one seems to notice?”
  • Leave for new employment: If a person is hard-working, motivated, innovative, they begin to look for a different place to work.  Just like our pilgrim’s failed effort, it leads to starvation.  Starvation is the sense that productivity begins to dwindle and those left tend to wither on the vine.

Winston Churchill (where are all these UK quotes coming from all of a sudden? 😉) is quoted as saying, “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those others that have been tried.”

Don’t put up with it

This form of socialism in the workplace leads to failure.  Every time I’ve seen the “deadwood” taken out of the system, I’ve seen productivity increase.  Not just for a moment, but long-term.  Pulling together a team of highly motivated, hard-working individuals will always lead to long-term productivity gains.

Build a Team

Build a team of highly motivated people, each being productive, and you will experience long-term growth like you’ve never seen before.

Radar

Recently I watched a documentary on the development of radar that is credited with saving England during the Nazi air blitz of London.  Many times individuals wanted to quit but they were always reminded that they were part of a team that was bigger than any individual.  It took a team to accomplish the goal.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCulture

The Most Important Asset in Your Life

by Ron Potter

“The Most Important Asset in Your Life” is an article by Zat Rana. I find it a well thought out and researched article.

One of the first quotes that may strike you (at least it did me) is that “Money is a means, not an end.” All too often, people think that if they just make enough money (an end), they’ll be happy. There is way too much research and general observation to get caught in that trap anymore (although many people still do).

Research shows that money is not a motivator that keeps people in jobs. People don’t leave jobs because of money! Nor do they stay in jobs for the money.

Interviews with entrepreneurs that have become very rich indicate that it was the work, trying something new, working on something they loved that kept them going. None of them spoke of the desire to get rich, that was a by-product of doing something they loved. Of course, they also didn’t talk about being dirt poor just so they could follow their dream. The point is, money didn’t enter the interview either good or bad.

But the real zinger comes when Zat says, “The most important asset in your life isn’t time, but attention. The quality of the experiences in your life doesn’t depend on how many hours there are in the day, but how the hours have been used”.

Attention

That is the key! We still have a limited amount of time in our lives and everyone has the same 24 hours per day. It’s not how much we do or don’t have, it’s how we use it. Where do we put our attention?

Today’s world is against us

I’ve written previous blogs on the need for deep thought. Today’s world is designed to keep us from the process of deep thought. The Googles, Twitters, Facebooks, etc. that fill today’s world are designed to capture our attention and keep it as long as possible. This diverts our thinking and pulls us away from deep thought on our desired topic. They are very good at what they do and are getting better (or worse) every day.

Zat mentions three things that help us focus and keep our attention on what is important:

Mindfulness

This is what helps us from getting distracted by what the world attacks us with and helps get us into and keeps us in deep thought. Zat says “By forcing yourself to focus your mind on one thing, you train your brain to develop a sense of control over your attention.” The world (high tech) wants to distract us and keep our attention on its ecosystem.

Ruthless Single-Tasking

Studies that I came across years ago said that only fighter pilots can multi-task and only because they are highly trained to multi-task because their life depends upon that ability. Zat says that single-tasking with deep focus (thought) for extended periods helps fight the adverse side-effects that are actually harmful to the brain.

Routine Detachment

Zat says that “Every time you pull out your phone to scan your social media accounts, and every time a 10-minute internet break turns into an hour-long binge, your brain is building a habit loop that reinforces itself to encourage such behavior.”

I’m not the best at some of this but there are a few things that have worked for me:

• I stopped watching TV news over a decade ago. It’s focused on the immediate and controversial. I’m interested in the long-term and unity. All TV, be it weather, financial, or whatever category, is entertainment. Once again, it’s designed to capture your attention and keep you away from deep thought.
• I get away. I’m writing this blog today in a cabin in the northern woods. There is almost nothing here to distract me. It helps me get into deep thought.

Find what gives you routine detachment. Everyone has a different approach but it’s important that you find what your’s is and do whatever you can to make your detachment (from the distractions of the world) into a routine. Routine means you do it on a regular basis. Don’t just assume that you’ll somehow work it into your life. Make it a routine and discipline yourself to follow that routine.

0 comments
1 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogLeadership

Increasing Skills Doesn’t Make a Good Leader

by Ron Potter

The thought behind this blog was from an article on Entrepreneur.com.  Here is the list they developed as they talked about increasing leadership skills.  I agree with the list but the short paragraph after each one is based on my learning and experiences.

Trust is not automatic

Many leaders believe they are leaders because of their position or accomplishments.  Neither one makes you a good leader.  In fact, many people in the position of power on the corporate ladder are there because of their accomplishments.  For the most part, corporations aren’t very good at measuring leadership skills, but they’re very good at measuring accomplishments.  Accomplishments are seen and identified and can be checked off on a spreadsheet.  Leadership is a long-term game.  The rewards of great leadership may be seen in the short term, but will really happen over the long-term.

Kindness is underrated

The article identifies this as conscious kindness.  It shows or demonstrates how members of the team should treat each other.  I would also suggest that it goes beyond team members.  This can make a huge difference with customer-facing people.  Kindness sets a cultural standard that can be seen and experienced throughout the corporation.

I was playing golf with a group of friends and we were visiting a new course for the first time.  Our experience can be summed up as rudeness.  The clerk behind the counter was rude.  The starter was rude.  The rangers were rude.  We found out later that the course had been built by a wealthy person who considered it his private course and outside players were considered as intrusions.  The course is no longer in existence.

A word of caution.  Many people view kindness as never saying a “disparaging” word.  There is an old song titled Home on the Range recorded by many artists including John Denver, the muppets, and others.  Two lines of the lyrics are

Where seldom is heard a discouraging word
And the skies are not cloudy all day

Having uncloudy skies all day can be wonderful but will also create many long term problems.  Rain is often needed.  Seldom hearing a discouraging word can also be wonderful but will also create long-term problems.  Honest criticism is often needed.  The interesting part is that criticism can be done in a very kind way with some practice.

I once worked with a leader who was certainly the “non-discouraging” type.  He was one of the kindest people I had ever met.  But his team would say to me, “I just wish I knew where I stand!”  When I asked for an explanation, they would say, “Our leader is so nice that I never hear one word of criticism.  That can’t be realistic.  “I just wish I knew where I stand.”

Be kind in your honesty.

Words are meaningless

Over the last several years I’ve been asked what I think of one President or another.  After figuring how to answer that question with kind honesty, I settled on the following approach.

I always say:  Watch what he does rather than listen to what he says.  This is another way of stating the old adage, “Action speaks louder than words.”

Again, some personal experience with another leader.  She would always say what she thought the recipient wanted to hear, regardless of what actions she would later take.  She thought it was kindness.  The people who worked for her saw it as a reason not to trust what she said.

Status quo is safe

IBM has lost much of the luster that it once had.  But during the years when I was dealing with IT departments, there was a saying that “Purchasing IBM equipment is always safe.”  Meaning that they could tell their leader that they had purchased IBM and the leaders would assume the best decision had been made.  Or at the very minimum, they would not criticize or fire the IT person for making the IBM decision.  It was safe!  It just wasn’t very innovative.

Power trips happen

As a father, I never wanted to resort to the words “Because I said so!” with my children.  Unfortunately, I can’t tell you how many times I violated that goal.  Power trips do happen, but in my book “Trust Me” the number one trait of trusted leaders is humility.  People know if it was a momentary power trip or a built-in trait.  Avoid power trips if you can.  Honestly apologize if they do happen.

Not everyone stays

One CEO I worked with said, “So you’ll show me who to fire from my current team?”  My answer was NO.  If you turn into a trustworthy leader, change the team and culture to match, people will self-select out.  People who don’t want to make the effort to follow the guidelines identified above, won’t stay.  They will seek an environment that allows them to ignore the guidelines above.

Look at each of the guidelines above.  How are you doing?  Each one takes discipline, growth, and a true belief that these traits will make a wonderful leader.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCulture

Manage people like Money?

by Ron Potter

An Harvard Business Review article was titled “What If Companies Managed People as Carefully as They Manage Money?”

I like the idea because most companies focus a lot of their effort on how they manage money, projects, profitability, and skillsets.

I don’t like the idea because I don’t think we should manage people (It puts them in the same category as the money, projects, profitability, etc.)  We should be leading people, not managing them.

IPO Preparation

One of my consulting clients was a high-tech firm that had decided to do an Initial Public Offering (IPO).  This means they were moving from a privately held firm to a publicly held firm with shareholders.

They needed to convince investors to put some of their hard-earned money into the new firm, assuming it would generate a reasonable return.

Investment Bankers

There is a sub-set of the banking industry (Investment Bankers) that is solely focused on IPO’s.  Once the Investment Bankers were chosen, the company put themselves in the banker’s hands in an effort to generate early and adequate investment.

So what did these bankers focus on?

The finances? No!
The quality of the leadership?  No!
The competition?  No!

These Investment Bankers focused on the “story.”  What was the story of the company?  What did the story tell the potential investor about the future?  Was the story compelling enough that people would actually depart with their money and invest with the company?

IPO Preparation

The Investment Bankers sent in a team of presenting coaches to help the CEO and CFO prepare to meet potential investors.

For weeks they concentrated on the story.  Was it complete?  Was it compelling?  Did it explain all the required changes and growth for the company?  Would people be willing to invest in this company?

Roadshow

All of this was to prepare these two top officers for the “roadshow.”  Over the next several weeks they would move from city to city, meet with a small group of investors and hopefully, capture their hearts and minds enough that the Investment Bankers were able to obtain commitments to invest.

Then the Investment Bankers made a statement that made me sit up and take notice.

You have 30 minutes

They told the CEO and CFO that if they didn’t capture the hearts and minds of the potential investors in 30 minutes, they were lost for forever.

30 minutes!  They had 30 minutes to get people to invest their money.  If it wasn’t compelling enough in the first 30 minutes, they didn’t have a second chance.  They would be lost forever.

Invest more than Dollars

Then I began to think about the employees.  What are we asking them to invest?

Money?  In a sense yes.
Time?  Yes.  Be here on a regular basis.  Be willing to cover any shift.  Be willing to work overtime when necessary.
Effort?  Be the best.  Go the extra mile.  Work hard and harder.
Brain?  Be quick.  Be innovative.  Be smarter than the competition.

Invest More

In short, invest more than just dollars.  Much more!

If we were willing to build a complete and compelling story about the future of the company for someone who will invest just their dollars, why are we not willing to generate even a better message for those willing to invest a lot more than just their dollars?

Investor not Asset

We often hear CEO’s and other top executives speak of employees as their most valuable asset.

I have assets.  My computer is an asset.  I’m willing to upgrade it, add more memory or space, install a new operating system.  But at some point I say enough-is-enough and I purchase a new computer.

Do we really want to think of employees as an asset?

But, if you think about them as an investor, then you need to be willing to give them your best.  You must have a compelling explanation of the future and how you’re going the get there.  If you can’t express that clear, well thought out future, why would employees be willing to invest their time, effort, and intellect?

Think of your employees as investors, not assets!

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCultureCulture Series

Culture – Other Financial Research

by Ron Potter

Through the years the Denison Organization has continued to perform research on the original model.  One piece of research that caught my eye early in the process looked at six normal measures of performance that most companies look at on a regular basis.  Those six measures included:

  • Profitability
  • Sales/Revenue Growth
  • Market Share
  • Product Development – Innovation
  • Quality of Product or Service
  • Employee Satisfaction

Most Culture Surveys focus on the last of the six measures, Employee Satisfaction.  Research originally done by the Gallup organization indicated that satisfied or engaged employees lead to better organizations.  I’ve looked at several of those surveys as my customers have used them.  I agree that more satisfied/engaged employees do lead to better organizations.  But, it was always difficult for me to figure out what actions lead to more satisfied employees.  The Denison Survey always provided me with more direct and measurable actions that would lead to employee satisfaction.

Four Quadrants

First, let’s remind ourselves what is included in each of the four quadrants.

Mission
Adaptability
Involvement
Consistency

Now, let’s take a look at each of the six measures of success and look at the Quadrants that drive them.

Profitability

  • Mission
  • Involvement

The description of this one given by the Denison organization is “Do we know where we are going?”  If it’s not clear where we’re going, it’s hard to figure out where profits will come from.

The description given to Involvement says “Are our people aligned and engaged?”  Know where you’re headed and engage the people in getting there.  Strength in these two quadrants will lead to profitability.  Notice that profitability requires elements of each of the “four” halves of the chart.  Mission is in the upper right quadrant.  Involvement resides in the lower left quadrant.  Top/Bottom, Left/Right.  Profitability requires a bit of it all.

Sales/Revenue Growth

The two quadrants driving this success factor include:

  • Mission
  • Adaptability

The description given to Adaptability is “Are we listening to the marketplace?”  This means that our Mission is being tweaked along the way to meet the needs of the marketplace.  If we’re listening.

Also notice that both of these quadrants are at the top of the chart.  This is the half that creates an Externally Focused organization.  This type of organization is very focused on the forces in the market place.

Market Share

  • Mission
  • Adaptability

These happen to be the same two as Sales/Revenue Growth.  In hind-site that might be abundantly clear.  But what has been interesting to me (and makes this connection even more powerful) is that even when the industry is trending downward at the moment, companies with strength in these two quadrants tend to perform better than others facing the same difficulties.

Product Development and Innovation

  • Adaptability
  • Involvement

Once you’re familiar with the layout of the survey, this one also becomes abundantly clear.  Both quadrants are on the left side of the chart which creates very flexible organizations.

Quality of Product or Service

  • Mission
  • Involvement
  • Consistency

This is the first of the performance measures that has strength in three areas rather than just two.  It adds Consistency.  People need to know what the Core Values are and the consequences for violating them.  They also require Agreement from everyone plus Coordination and Integration across the organization.  There can be no disagreement on how we do things around here and no piece of the business making decisions that benefit themselves and not the whole company.

Notice it does not include customer focus.  Quality is internally driven, not externally driven.

Employee Satisfaction

  • Mission
  • Involvement
  • Consistency

This is usually the one that is measured by Culture Surveys.  What’s interesting to me is that this one is driven by exactly the same quadrants that drive Quality.   A clear mission, active involvement and consistency drive quality, and satisfaction!

Where do We Start?

One of my colleagues calls this the “So what, Now What?” question.  Now that I know this information, where do I start or what do I do with it?

One way to answer that question is to see how many of the performance maesures are driven by each quadrants.

Mission is involved in five of the six performance measures:
  • Profitability
  • Growth
  • Market Share
  • Quality
  • Employee Satisfaction
Involvement is involved in four of the measures:
  • Profitability
  • Development/Innovation
  • Quality
  • Employee Satisfaction
Adaptability is involved in three:
  • Growth
  • Market Share
  • Development/Innovation
Consistency is involved in two:
  • Quality
  • Employee Satisfaction

I always suggested that you start with Mission, get everyone Involved, increase your Adaptability and change and finally make sure that you’re absolutely consistent in your approach.

Build a Great Culture

Great cultures are absolutely required to build great companies.  Just don’t forget the other two elements of being great:

TLC

Team Leadership and Culture.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCultureCulture Series

Culture – Involvement: Adaptability

by Ron Potter

Adaptability and Involvement

Adaptability and Involvement are the two quadrants that make up the left side of the Denison Culture Chart.  This side of the chart identifies “Flexible” cultures.  Cultures that adapt well.  Cultures that respond quickly to customers and markets.  In today’s fast-paced environment, flexibility is a requirement.  (Just as a heads-up, we’re going to talk in a couple of weeks about Stability being a required element as well.  Makes your head hurt doesn’t it?  That’s just one of the reasons that Leadership is hard.  It doesn’t just come with the title.

External Focus

So now we’ve seen that Mission and Adaptability (top of the chart) indicates an External Focus for the companies.  Companies strong in these two areas tend to sustain growth and are constantly listening to and looking at the marketplace.  They’re good at spotting the next big thing in the market place and making decisions that help them take advantage of those coming changes.

Flexible

The Flexible Cultures (Adaptability and Involvement noted above) indicated companies that are constantly changing.  Or maybe it indicates that the companies are good at working in ever-changing markets.

One company had a culture score that was lowest in the Vision and Strategic Direction and Intent areas while being quite strong in all of the Flexible areas on the left side of the chart.  We asked about the low scores in the Mission quadrant, wondering how they kept going without much vision or strategic thinking for the future.  They indicated that their market was changing so rapidly that figuring out a vision and direction was almost useless.  If they didn’t keep up with the rapid changes in the marketplace, they weren’t going to be around to worry about long-term (even 24 months) vision.  They were right.

Focus

In general, it’s always good to expand the Culture Survey as much as possible in every direction.  However, there are “seasons of life” and moments of focus that may require expansion in a particular area.

Maybe you’re in need of growth which will require an external focus.  You may need to expand some or all of the Vision and Adaptability quadrants.

Maybe you’re in the need to keep up with or get ahead of a rapidly changing market or a disruptive competitor.  You may need to focus on the Adaptability and Involvement quadrants (Flexible).

Be aware of your surroundings, history, and future.  Which quadrant needs the most attention at the moment?

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCultureCulture Series

Culture – Adaptability: Summary

by Ron Potter

It’s easy to see but often challenging to implement an adaptable organization.

It takes

Humility is required because it forces you to suspend your belief about what is the right direction to learn, listen, and change.

It also requires respect.  I’ve talked about Jordan Peterson and his 12 Rules for Life.  One of my favorite rules is number nine, which states “Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you don’t.”  Live by that rule alone, and you’ll experience change and growth.

But, now that we’ve looked at the first two quadrants, Mission and Adaptability, I would like to think about them as a pair.

Mission and Adaptability are at the top of the Denison Culture Survey.  If you look at the very top of the circle, you’ll see

the words “External Focus.”  External Focus means that the quadrants of Mission and Adaptability look “outside.”  They are not focused on what goes on internal to the organization, but what is going on beyond the walls of the organization.

Organizations who have high scores in these quadrants at the top of the chart tend to be focused on and achieve growth and market share.

What I find interesting is the research behind these two quadrants.

Research indicates that during down times when market share and growth shrink, companies who have high scores in these two quadrants seem to be less impacted by the negative situation.

If growth and market share is your goal, make sure the people of your company score you highly in these two quadrants.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCultureCulture Series

Culture – Adaptability: Creating Change

by Ron Potter

One of the more impactful aspects of this Creating Change sections is summed up in the statement:

“We respond well to competitors and other changes in the business environment.”

One of my first experiences with the Denison Culture Survey was with a company that had been the undisputed leader of their industry for over 100 years.  However, over the last few years, they had been losing market share to new start-ups in their industry.  By the time they needed outside help, things had fallen to critical points, and their profitability had all but disappeared.

First Culture Survey

When we saw the results of their first survey, it was immediately obvious from a consulting point of view.  They scored highest in the Consistency quadrant.  Meaning they had been doing things in a very consistent way for over 100 years (we’ll look at the Consistency quadrant in more detail in future posts).

They scored lowest in the Creating Change section of Adaptability.

And on the statement “We respond well to competitors and other changes in the business environment,” they scored in the bottom 10% of all companies.  They did NOT respond well to competitors and other changes in the business environment.

Why had they not responded?

After gathering the results of the survey, we displayed the overall graph of their results.  The leadership team went silent after reviewing the results.  It was not because they were in shock.  It was because the results revealed what they suspected was the problem all along.   They had continued to function just as they had done for over a century in spite of knowing that the market place was rapidly changing around them.

But, this visual representation of their situation allowed them to open up and be honest with each other for the first time.

We’ve always done it this way

Their first response was to admit they knew they were in trouble over three years ago when they first experienced a loss of market share and a drop in their profits.  At their annual leadership retreat, they decided that the drop would be overcome if they just buckled down and did a better job.  After all, they had been successful for over 100 years.  If they just did a better job of doing what they did well, they would pull out of this tailspin.

We don’t have a better solution

At their leadership retreat two years ago the results had continued to drop but they decided it must be a temporary issue and if they just continued to stay focused and work harder, this would be overcome like many dips throughout their history.  They didn’t have a better answer.

Now we see the problem

While they were stunned with the results of their culture survey, you could almost detect a sense of relief on many of their faces.  They were all exhausted from working hard and long.  They had sacrificed their personal lives including family and health just because they didn’t have a better answer.  Now they could see the issue more clearly which allowed them to talk about and work toward a more feasible solution.

Coherent Change

Other areas of the Creating Change section referred to issues such as:

  • Flexibility
  • Improved processes
  • New ways of doing things
  • Lower the resistance to change
  • Get the entire organization pulling together in the new direction

These things they could begin to plan around.  The Culture Survey had added a new vitality to the leadership team.  You could feel the energy rising in the room as they began to talk about and plan for change and a new way of doing things.

Improvement

While they never fully recovered the overwhelming market share they once held, they did become a much more competitive force in the market place.  They were suddenly fighting for and scrapping for every inch of growth in the market place, and the “new” competitors were fighting a new approach from an old competitor.  They were now forcing changes in the industry, and the “new” competitors had to respond.

Blockbuster

If I tried to list all of the companies that were once a force in the industry but no longer existed, there would be too many to include in a blog.

I read the other day that Blockbuster (the DVD company with thousands of retail stores) had a chance to purchase Netflix for a very reasonable amount.  They passed.  It would have eaten into their retail store, walk-in business.

Today, Netflix is one of the hottest companies in the market place.  Blockbuster doesn’t exist.

Change or Die

We’ve used this adage many times in the last several blog posts.  But it’s true.  If you’re not changing and adapting, you will soon be nothing more than an empty store in a strip mall with a faded outline of your logo and former glory.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCultureCulture Series

Culture – Mission: Summary

by Ron Potter

We just finished the three segments of the Mission portion of the Denison Culture Survey.  As a quick recap of each section:

Vision

Is the direction and future image of the company clear to everyone?  Everyone from the leadership team down through the entire organization?  Is there unity about what that vision is and how it will be executed within every part of the organization?

Goals and Objectives

Is it clear how everyone’s daily work, goals, and objectives contribute and lead toward that unified vision?  If people are simply accomplishing the “task of the day” without thought of how it contributes to the vision, the mission has not penetrated the organization enough to make a difference.

Strategic Direction

Every organization is vulnerable to changes and disruptions in the market place.  Is there a clear strategic direction to help guide people through those potential impacts?

Why Mission?

But, I started with Mission because Dr. Denison and his organization are great researchers first!  They have continued to dig deep into the impact of culture on the performance of organizations.

One of the studies looked at six different performance issues.  Those six included:

  • Profitability/Return On Assets
  • Growth Sales/Revenue
  • Market Share
  • Product Development/Innovation
  • Quality
  • Employee Satisfaction

As the researchers discovered, Mission was impactful in five of the six measurements.  In other words, if your Mission:

  • Vision
  • Goals and Objectives
  • Strategic Direction and Intent

are not on solid footing, you don’t have much of a chance at achieving

  • profitability
  • growth
  • market share
  • quality (product or service)
  • employee satisfaction.

When it comes to building a great corporate culture, get your mission unified and deeply penetrated first or don’t waste your time.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCultureCulture Series

Culture: Introduction

by Ron Potter

What is Culture?

A dictionary definition says “the set of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that characterizes an organization.”

We hear a lot about a corporate culture being toxic or exciting or siloed or productive.  But in my mind, many of those conditions have more to do with Teams and Leadership than they do with Culture.

If there is a toxic environment, that’s usually caused by poor leadership that is ego driven rather than humbly driven.

Exciting environments come from leaders and teams developing people to face difficulties and obstacles in innovative thoughtful ways that utilize the skills and experiences present.

Siloed environments happen when teams are unable to work through their difference and reach a committed direction or approach.

Productive environments exist when teams learn how to elegantly use the resources they have to get the most out of an organization in a simple way.

Focusing on “culture” doesn’t cure any of the identified difficulties or enhance any of the identified strengths.  Building better teams and leadership improves those issues.

So what should be looked at when we think about and measure culture?

Culture Model

I first met Dan Denison many years ago when he was completing his research on corporate culture at the University of Michigan.  One of the things that caught my attention right from the start was Dan’s purpose in finding those items that can be measured on a survey that actually impact the bottom-line performance of an organization.  I knew that would catch the interest of every senior corporate leader I was working with.  They are very bottom-line focused.  If Dan could demonstrate that certain parts of the environment or culture actually had an effect on financial performance, I knew we had a winner.

From that initial work, Dan has gone on to be Professor of Management and Organization at IMD – International Institute of Management Development in Switzerland as well as found and become CEO of Denison Consulting in Ann Arbor, MI.  I would encourage you to visit his website at www.denisonconsulting.com.

The Denison model identifies four quadrants with three subsets each.  In this blog, I’ll introduce the four quadrants and then go on to explore each one in more detail over the next few months.

Four Quadrants of Corporate Cultures

Mission – Adaptability – Involvement – Consistency

Much of the wording you’ll see to describe each of these quadrants come directly from the Denison materials.  I trust Dan will see that as flattery and not plagiarism.

Mission

“Do we know where we are going?”

High performing organizations have a mission that tells employees why they are doing the work they do, and how the work they do each day contributes to the why.

Adaptability

“Are we listening to the marketplace?”

High performing organizations have the ability to perceive and respond to the environment, customers, and restructure and re-institutionalize behaviors and processes that allow them to adapt.

Involvement

“Are our people aligned and engaged?”

Highly involved organizations create a sense of ownership and responsibility.  Out of this sense of ownership grows a greater commitment to the organization and an increased capacity for autonomy.

Consistency

“Does our system create leverage?”

Consistency provides a central source of integration, coordination, and control, and helps organizations develop a set of systems that create an internal system of governance based on consensual support.

Schedule

Over the next several weeks I’ll break down each one of these four quadrants into their three subsets and share many experiences I’ve had through the years of companies that have improved over time.  Some of them have changed rapidly, others slowly but steadily and unfortunately some not at all.  But there always seemed to be reasons for the growth and development or lack thereof.  One thing that has been very clear, the growth and development that did or did not occur was caused by internal issues, not external environments.

Just as a reminder, these blogs will be our Thursday morning series.  Our Monday morning blogs will be less structured and disciplined and made up of issues and ideas that are striking me at the moment.

Thanks for coming along on this journey with me.  I’ve appreciated your loyalty and comments.  And don’t forget to share this connection with someone you know.  It will be more fun when we increase the size of our community.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogTrust Me

What Makes for a Great Leader: Two Pillars

by Ron Potter

Over the last several years, investors suddenly began looking for CEOs who could shake things up and put an end to what was perceived as a business-as-usual approach. A new breed of corporate leader emerged: the charismatic CEO. A fervent and often irrational faith in the power of dynamic leaders became part of our culture.

Rakesh Khurana writes,

Faith is an invaluable, even indispensable gift in human affairs.… In the sphere of business, the faith of entrepreneurs, leaders, and ordinary employees in a company, a product, or an idea can unleash tremendous amounts of innovation and productivity. Yet today’s extraordinary trust in the power of the charismatic CEO resembles less a mature faith than it does a belief in magic. If, however, we are willing to begin rethinking our ideas about leadership, the age of faith can be followed by an era of faith and reason.

The adventure of looking for the charismatic leader sometimes asked us to turn our backs on attributes such as honesty, integrity, sensitivity, commitment, achievement, nurturing, trustworthiness, peacemaking, and courage.

But as Jim Collins explained so convincingly in his best-selling book Good to Great, it is the non-charismatic leader who seems to endure and shine in the long run. Collins writes:

Compared to high-profile leaders with big personalities who make headlines and become celebrities, the good-to-great leaders [leaders who have taken companies to unprecedented long-term growth] seem to have come from Mars. Self-effacing, quiet, reserved, even shy—these leaders are a paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will. They are more like Lincoln and Socrates than Patton or Caesar.

In my book Trust Me, I outline eight attributes of a truly great leader. I refer to two of those attributes as the pillars: humility and endurance. Focusing on these two pillars is like so many things (golf included) that are both simple and complex. However, our experience tells us that great leaders allow these two attributes, whether natural or not, to strongly influence their leadership style. They learn how to overcome or “position” their natural tendencies. They let the two pillars “pull them through” their swing of everyday leadership and team building.

Great leaders seek to be humble people who lift up others and keep the spotlight on their companies, not themselves. They have a burning ambition to see tasks completed, and they balance that desire with a deep concern for the growth and development of people. They want to nurture relationships, help others flourish, and shove the fuss away from themselves.

Pressure and mounting fear can drive you away from the two pillars in order to succeed in the short run, but it will not last or create trust. It will only drive a wedge between you and the true success you can have as a leader who focuses on the two pillars and the other attributes.

Once again I want to remind you of the power contained in these qualities—and how the opposite qualities can destroy the great person you want to become and the great organization you want to lead.

We all have the ability to adapt these attributes to our particular leadership styles. You have the ability to start today. Why wait any longer?

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogLeadership

Arresting Avoidance

by Ron Potter

The tendency to avoid problems and the emotional suffering inherent in them is the primary basis of all human mental illness.”
—M. Scott Peck

Avoidance-oriented people tend to move away from things that threaten them in order to protect themselves. Why? There are a number of reasons.

Avoidance as Protection

Often it is due to excessive concern about embarrassment. We just don’t want to be embarrassed or, more often, to embarrass someone else. We hold back—we don’t tell the truth—and poor organizational or personal behaviors are perpetuated.

Fear is another culprit. Sometimes it just seems easier to run and hide. Maybe the issue will somehow just go away? That’s classic avoidance—a sign of cowardly leadership.

Another reason for avoiding problems can be oversensitivity to the feelings or opinions of others. We just don’t want to hurt anybody. The other person is so nice; why should she have her parade rained upon? Issues are circumvented, and facts are ignored. We avoid the short-term pain and inflict a longer-term problem within the team and the organization.

And then there is the old standby character quality that causes so many problems: unhealthy pride. Some of the people who are most adept at avoidance are very proud, especially if exploring the gory details of an organizational issue might make them look bad.

Overcoming Avoidance

Leaders who develop a humble heart and a willingness to confront concerns do not allow pride to interfere. They are open to opportunities for self-growth because they are secure in who they are and are not preoccupied with themselves.

Avoidance holds back an organization whereas a commitment to improvement will positively influence your own development as well as the development of interpersonal relationships, teams, and overall company effectiveness.

It takes great courage to change a pattern of avoidance and seek instead to make improvements and overcome the pain or difficulty in making decisions, confronting people, or being overwhelmed by circumstances or self-doubt. It is not easy, but the benefits you will experience from making this change are far greater than the “benefits” of avoidance.

Freedom from avoidance enables leaders to focus attention on determining when a situation needs action and improvement.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts