robust dialogue

You cannot have an execution culture without robust dialogue - one that brings reality to the surface through openness, candor, and informality. Robust dialogue makes an organization effective in gathering information, understanding the information, and reshaping it to produce decisions. It fosters creativity - most innovations and inventions are incubated through robust dialogue. Ultimately, it creates more competitive advantage and shareholder value.

Robust dialogue starts when people go in with open minds. They're not trapped by preconceptions or armed with a private agenda. They want to hear new information and choose the best alternatives, so they listen to all sides of the debate and make their own contributions. 

When people speak candidly, they express their real opinions, not those that will please the power players or maintain harmony. Indeed, harmony - sought by many leaders who wish to offend no one - can be the enemy of truth. It can squelch critical thinking and drive decision making underground. When harmony prevails, here's how things often get settled: after the key players leave the session, they quietly veto decisions they didn't like but didn't debate on the spot. A good motto to observe is "Truth over harmony." Candor helps wipe out the silent lies and pocket vetoes, and it prevents the stalled initiatives and rework that drain energy. 

Larry Bossidy & Ram Charan 

Execution: The Discipline of Getting Things Done by Larry Bossidy & Ram Charan with Charles Burck. 2002. Crown Business, NY, NY. p. 102, 103

you've got to make mistakes

No one does the leader's job flawlessly, believe me. You've got to make mistakes and learn from them. Yankees manager Joe Torree got fired three times during his career. Now he's looked upon as the icon of the game. He learned some things along the way. 

In his book, Jack: Straight from the Gut, Jack Welch freely admits he made many hiring mistakes in his early years. He made a lot of decisions from instinct. But when he was wrong, he'd say, "It's my fault." He'd ask himself why he was wrong, he'd listen to other people, he'd get more data, and he'd figure it out. And he just kept getting better and better. He also recognized that it's not useful to beat other people up when they make mistakes. To the contrary, that's the time to coach them, encourage them, and help them regain their self-confidence.

Larry Bossidy

Execution: The Discipline of Getting Things Done by Larry Bossidy & Ram Charan with Charles Burck. 2002. Crown Business, NY, NY. p. 83

a test of leadership

In the monthly "performance call,"... [the leader], his COO, and his CFO began hosting Monday-morning conference calls of the company's roughly top 150 leaders. These calls are essentially an ongoing operating review, in which the company's performance for the previous month and the year to date is compared with the commitments people have made. The calls provide early warning of problems and instill a sense of urgency. People who fall short have to explain why, and what they are going to do about it....

At one of the first meetings, [Dick Brown, CEO of EDS] recalls, "one of the executives made the statement that he was worried about growing anxiety and unrest in his organization, worried about rapid and dramatic change. His people were asking, 'Are we moving too fast, are we on the threshold of being reckless? Maybe we should slow down, take it easy, reflect a bit.'"

Brown turned the issue around - not incidentally, creating a forceful coaching lesson. "I jumped all over that. 'This is a test of leadership,' I said. 'I would like anybody on this call who is really worried about where we are going and worried about the fact that we will probably fail, tell me so right now. Don't be afraid to say you are. If you think we're making a big mistake and heading for the reef, speak up now.'

"No one did. So I said, 'If you're not worried, where's the worry coming from? I'm not worried, and you're not worried. Here's where it is: some of you say one thing, and your body language says another. You show me an organization that's wringing its hands, listening to rumors, anxious about the future, and I will show you leadership that behaves the same way. People imitate their leaders. If your organization is worried, you've got a problem, because you said you're not.'

"And I put it right back on that. 'Here's your test of leadership; now calm your organization, give them information; strike right at the heart of their worries. I can't believe that their worry is fact-based. I believe their worry is ignorance-based. And if that's the case, it's your fault.'"

Larry Bossidy & Ram Charan 

Execution: The Discipline of Getting Things Done by Larry Bossidy & Ram Charan with Charles Burck. 2002. Crown Business, NY, NY. p. 48-50

only the leader can make execution happen

An organization can execute only if the leader's heart and soul are immersed in the company. Leading is more than thinking big, or schmoozing with investors and lawmakers, although those are part of the job. The leader has to be engaged personally and deeply in the business. Execution requires a comprehensive understanding of a business, its people, and its environment. The leader is the only person in a position to achieve that understanding. And only the leader can make execution happen, through his or her deep personal involvement in the substance and even the details of execution.

The leader must be in charge of getting things done by running the three core processes - picking other leaders, setting the strategic direction, and conducting operations. These actions are the substance of execution, and leaders cannot delegate them regardless of the size of the organization.

How good would a sports team be if the coach spent all of his time in his office making deals for new players, while delegating actual coaching to an assistant? A coach is effective because he's constantly observing players individually and collectively on the field and in the locker room. That's how he gets to know his players and their capabilities, and how they get firsthand the benefit of his experience, wisdom, and expert feedback.

It's no different for a business leader. Only a leader can ask the tough questions that everyone needs to answer, then manage the process of debating the information and making the right trade-offs. And only the leader who's intimately engaged in the business can know enough to have the comprehensive view and ask the tough incisive questions. 

Only the leader can set the tone of the dialogue in the organization. Dialogue is the core of culture and the basic unit of work. How people talk to each other absolutely determines how well the organization will function. Is the dialogue stilted, politicized, fragmented, and butt-covering? Or is it candid and reality-based, raising the right questions, debating them, and finding realistic solutions? If it's the former - as it is in all too many companies - reality will never come to the surface. If it is to be the latter, the leader has to be on the playing field with his management team, practicing it consistently and forcefully. 

Specifically, the leader has to run the three core processes and has to run them with intensity and rigor. 

Larry Bossidy & Ram Charan 

Execution: The Discipline of Getting Things Done by Larry Bossidy & Ram Charan with Charles Burck. 2002. Crown Business, NY, NY. p. 24, 25

it took constant communication

Alison: Talk about navigating the Covid-19 crisis and racial reckoning. How did you work with the players, the teams, and NBA management on that?

Chris: That could be a book in itself. Once again, it took constant communication. During the shutdown, I was on Zooms every day with Adam Silver and others trying to figure out how to get the season going again from scratch: where to play, what the locker rooms would look like, even the messaging on the court. The NBA has 450 players, including some of the most recognizable people in the world. They’re not always going to have the same beliefs or be on the same page. But everyone just wants to be able to have an opinion and be heard and taken seriously. That’s what we did through it all, and everything was voted upon. My leadership style was always to overcommunicate, let everybody share their insights, and then talk about where we wanted to go. After George Floyd, we went to the [biosecure] bubble to keep playing and tried to raise awareness. Then the Jacob Blake shooting [by police] happened. So we got all the players in a room and decided to stop games for a day. Usually in the NBA, after you play a game against someone, you say, “Hey man, everything good with you?” “Yeah, all good.” “All right, y’all have a good rest of the season.” But in the bubble we got a chance to really spend time together, look each other in the eyes, and figure out how we all could be better.

Alison Beard

Life's Work: An Interview with Chris Paul. Harvard Business Review. September-October 2023.

organizations launching multiple change programs

What should organizations launching multiple change programs do differently? First and foremost, they should take the holistic view. The top management team (TMT) orchestrating change management should draw up a map of all the initiatives, planned or ongoing, occurring within the organization. This map should incorporate all of the vantage points that matter: not only the perspectives of top management, but also those of middle management and front-line employees. Middle managers and employees may perceive inconsistencies among these change initiatives more clearly than TMTs can, and they may well offer practical ideas about how to address inconsistencies upfront.

Once the organization has mapped out all employees’ perceptions of inconsistency in various initiatives, it should consider how to address these inconsistencies from the start. TMTs can stay ahead of the game by preparing a clear, consistent communication narrative explaining the necessity for multiple initiatives as opposed to one, detailing exactly how they fit together. Such a narrative can preempt the perception of inconsistency on all three levels: content, procedure, and normative expectations.

The timing and pacing of each initiative are additional key considerations. TMTs should have a clear idea of which initiatives can be wrapped up quickly and which may take years — and when to launch or stop each one. With a clearer time frame, they can ward off inconsistency by ensuring, for example, that one team isn’t assigned two conflicting tasks at the same time or that teams aren’t saddled with a storm of changes that could overwhelm their capacity.

TMTs should also monitor whether each key initiative has been allocated adequate resources. Remember that strategic change is exhausting, and periods of high activity should be followed by intervals of rest or less-intense work. The alternative to careful timing may well be burnout, which is an even greater threat to change performance than inconsistency.

Ultimately, successful change managers shift their focus from single initiatives to the dynamics among multiple initiatives. A successful transformation typically does not rely on any single change initiative but emerges from the careful management of multiple, integrated initiatives that interact and reinforce one another over time. One key success factor is to be alert to emerging inconsistencies among various initiatives regarding content, procedures, and normative expectations. These emerging inconsistencies can cause initial supporters to resist change, ultimately undermining the initiatives. Instead, taking the deliberate, comprehensive approach described here can drive your success in leading change.

Quy Nguyen Huy, Rouven Kanitz, Julia Backmann, and Martin Hoegl

"How to Reduce the Risk of Colliding Change Initiatives," MITSloan Management Review. June 3, 2021

the ikea effect

The Ikea effect was popularized by a Harvard Business School research paper. In one study, two sets of subjects were asked to price a set of Ikea storage boxes. The first group had built the boxes themselves; the second group simply took a look at the furniture before coming up with a price.

The result? The persons who built the boxes placed much higher value on the product, leading to an insightful conclusion: 

When you participate in the building process, you value the result more.

Justin Bariso

"Twitter's New CEO Keeps Repeating 1 Word. It's a Brilliant Lesson in How to Create Change," Inc. May 15, 2023 

open-source change management

Open-source change management embraces employees as active participants in change planning and implementation. It requires three shifts in thinking:

• Involve employees in decision-making. This isn’t about allowing employees to vote on every change; it means finding ways to infuse the voice of those most impacted into your planning. Gartner research has found that this step alone can increase your change success by 15%. It makes change management a meritocracy, where you increase the odds that the best ideas and inputs are included in decision-making.
• Shift implementation planning to employees. Leaders often don’t have enough visibility into the daily workflows of their teams to dictate a successful change approach. And leaving the workforce out of change implementation can increase resistance and failure. Gartner research has found that when employees own implementation planning, change success increases by 24%.
• Engage in two-way conversations throughout the change process. Instead of focusing on how you’ll sell the change to employees, think of communications as a way to surface employee reactions. Holding regular, honest conversations about the change will allow employees to share their questions and opinions, which will drive understanding and make them feel like they’re part of the commitment to change. Gartner research has found that this step can increase change success by 32%.

Cian O Morain and Peter Aykens

"Employees Are Losing Patience with Change Initiatives," Harvard Business Review. May 9, 2023

failure to engage

Design thinking suggests that failure to engage the affected parties at the very beginning of the process ensures resistance to change and the potential failure of the change programme itself.

Design thinking recognises that people impacted by change have the best and most nuanced view, not only of the solution, but the actual problem itself. When design thinking is incorporated into a change management programme, practitioners are able to get a deep understanding of the problem from the perspective of all affected parties. Subsequently, the same people can devise a solution that satisfies the needs, feelings and attitudes of all, be they management who recognise there is a problem or the people who will ultimately action the solution itself.

Colleen d’Offay

"5 ways to improve change management through design thinking," Inside HR. April 13, 2018

root-cause mind-sets

Mind-sets ingrained by past management practices remain ingrained far beyond the existence of the practices that formed them, even when new management practices have been put in place.

Here are three business examples that underscore the perils of ignoring this lesson. Example one: a bank that identified how its high performers succeeded in cross-selling decided to roll out a change program with support scripts and good profiling questions for the other bankers to use—and was dismayed to find that these moves had a negligible impact on sales. A second example: a telco introduced a dramatically simplified process and rating system for performance reviews only to find that its leaders still avoided delivering tough messages. Finally: a manufacturer invested hundreds of millions in a knowledge-management technology platform meant to discourage hoarding and encourage collaboration—only to declare, several months later, that the system had been a complete failure.

In all these examples, the companies did a good job of recognizing the behavioral change needed to achieve the desired goals. Yet they didn’t take the time, or use the tools available, to understand why smart, hard-working, and well-intentioned employees continued to behave as before.

At the bank, for instance, two seemingly good but ultimately performance-limiting mind-sets accounted for the failure of the new sales-stimulation tools and training. The first was “my job is to give the customers what they want”; the second, “I should follow the Golden Rule and treat my customers as I would like to be treated.” At the telco, employees had a deep-seated, reasonable-sounding belief that “criticism damages relationships.” At the manufacturing company, people had an underlying conviction that “around here, information is power, and good leaders are powerful leaders.”

The upshot? By looking at—and acting on—only observable behavior, company leaders overlooked its underlying root causes. Consequently, the change efforts of all three organizations led to disappointment.

Once the root-cause mind-sets are identified, the next step is to reframe those beliefs and thereby expand the range of reasonable behavioral choices employees make, day in and day out. That creates the caterpillar-to-butterfly effect described earlier. Would different beliefs, for example, have inspired expanded and better-informed behavioral choices for average-performing bankers? If so, which beliefs? Suppose they believed that their job—indeed, the way they add value for others—was to “help customers fully understand their needs” rather than “giving customers what they want.” Also, what if instead of applying the “Golden Rule,” bankers applied the “Platinum Rule”: treating others as they (rather than bankers) want to be treated.

And what if the telco executives, in their performance-management discussions, had believed that “honesty—combined with respect—doesn’t damage relationships; in fact, it is essential to building strong ones”? And what if the manufacturing managers had thought that “sharing information rather than hoarding is the best way to magnify power”? Had they believed that, the company very likely wouldn’t have needed an expensive (and ultimately futile) knowledge-management system to help employees reach out to one another and share best practices.

Beneath each of the reframes described above, it’s important to note, lies a deeper shift in worldview. For example, moving from the giving-customers-what-they-want mind-set to helping them fully understand what they really need reflects a move from subordinate to peer. Recognizing that honesty builds rather than destroys relationships reflects a shift from victimhood to mastery. And choosing to believe that power is expanded by sharing information, not that hoarding information is power, focuses on abundance, not scarcity.

"Getting personal about change," by Scott Keller and Bill Schaninger. McKinsey Quarterly. August 21, 2019. 

he doesn’t have a desk

When New York-Presbyterian CIO Daniel Barchi arrives at work in the morning, he doesn’t sit down at his desk. That’s because he doesn’t have a desk — or an office — of his own. “I guide a very, very large team of IT people, but I don’t have one office where I go every day,” he says.

Instead, Barchi may spend the day working in the building that houses the company’s back-office systems. Or he may spend the day in one of its hospitals, meeting with executives or doing a walkthrough. Every day is different, and that’s the point, he says. “You can’t understand the needs of the clinicians unless you are meeting with them.”

Not every CIO can or should give up their own office, he adds. But his choice to do so reflects an inescapable fact: “The technology can work, but unless it works well for users in their environment, it’s not meeting their needs.”

Minda Zetlin

"7 hard truths of business-IT alignment," CIO. October 31, 2022

i'll gladly change

If anyone can refute me – show me I’m making a mistake or looking at things from the wrong perspective – I’ll gladly change.

It’s the truth I’m after, and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance.

Marcus Aurelius

Meditations by Marcus Aurelius. Modern Library. 2003. P.73, Book 6, #21. Also see The Internet Classics Archive | The Meditations by Marcus Aurelius (mit.edu)

how would you like me to show up for you ?

Favorite questions to ask my new direct reports as I onboard: how would you like me to show up for you so that I become one of the best managers you've ever had? Never fails to surprise and delight them.

After asking direct reports what they want from you as a manager, the work's not over. Share specifics about your style and how you plan to be present for them and be honest about where you might not be able to be supportive + why so that expectations are clear from the start. 

Nikkia Akua Reveillac

Twitter. October 13, 2021. 

doing a helluva job

My officers knew that they could always use me in their leadership toolkits. They never hesitated to knock on my door and say, "Hey, Captain, next time you're out walking around the ship, Sonarman Smith really aced that databank," or "Seaman Jones is doing a helluva job in the laundry. Could you stop by and tell him how much you appreciate him?"

Those conversations were the highlight of my day, and they didn't cost me or the Navy a dime. The more I went around meeting sailors, the more they talked to me openly and intelligently. The more I thanked them for hard work, the harder they worked. The payoff in morale was palpable. I'm absolutely convinced that positive, personal reinforcement is the essence of effective leadership. Yet some leaders seem to be moving away from it. They stay connected electronically with e-mail and cell phones, but they're disconnected personally, and many leaders almost never leave their offices. People seem to think that if you send somebody a compliment online, it's as good as the human touch. It is not. It's easier, but much less effective. Social interaction is getting lost in a digital world that trades more in abstractions than in face-to-face relations. It's more than a shame - it's a bottom-line mistake.

As I have said before, my sister Connie works for a major bank. One of her people did a phenomenal job, making hundreds of thousands of dollars for the bank, and Connie's boss sent an e-mail congratulating and thanking her. That very afternoon, he rode the elevator with her and didn't even acknowledge her existence. It completely wiped out any good his e-mail could have done.

Recall how you feel when your own boss tells you, "Good job." Do your people (and yourself) a favor. Say it in person, if you can. Press the flesh. Open yourself. Coldness congeals. Warmth heals. Little things make big successes.

D. Michael Abrashoff

It's Your Ship: Management Techniques from the Best Damn Ship in the Navy by D. Michael Abrashoff. Grand Central Publishing. 2007. p.143,144

if that's respect, then I want none of it

I wish I could say that the need to improve listening skills and less-than-perfect coordination happened only in the past. But the tragic sinking of a Japanese fishing boat off Honolulu by the submarine USS Greenville suggests otherwise. The moment I heard about it, I was reminded that, as is often the case with accidents, someone senses possible danger but doesn't necessarily speak up. As the Greenville investigation unfolded, I read in a New York Times article that the submarine's crew "respected the commanding officer too much to question his judgement." If that's respect, then I want none of it. You need to have people in your organization that can tap you on your shoulder and say, "Is this the best way?" or "Slow down," or "Think about this," or "Is what we are doing worth killing or injuring somebody?"

D. Michael Abrashoff

It's Your Ship: Management Techniques from the Best Damn Ship in the Navy by D. Michael Abrashoff. Grand Central Publishing. 2007. p.91,92

how to be less wrong

Have you ever been taught that if you want to understand someone, you need to put yourself in their shoes?

It's a helpful rule of thumb because it reminds us that the way we see the world is not the way other people do. But there is some danger in this approach. 

Here's why.

We are not nearly as good at understanding others' perspectives as we think we are. Of course, sometimes we guess right, but often we guess wrong...

But here's what is surprising to me. 

It seems obvious that asking someone how they feel helps us better understand them. Yet, how many of us choose to guess how other people feel instead of simply asking them? 

 

Don't guess the perspective of another person. Instead, ask them. 

• Ask customers, What is the most valuable thing we do for you? Where could we be better?
• Ask your team to share the friction points of a current project and ask how you can help reduce them. 
• Ask a family member to send you a link to something they would like for Christmas. 

Greg McKeown

"How to Be Less Wrong," One Minute Wednesday. September 21, 2022

taking accountability for culture

I think it's about time that organizations and their senior leadership really start taking accountability for their culture. There has been a war for talent for years now, but it’s only getting worse. It’s easy for the finger to be pointed towards recruiting or human resources, or towards broken processes or compensation and benefits not being correct, but overall, for many organizations the culture of leadership needs to seriously be addressed. Research has shown for years that money is not what motivates most people. It definitely contributes to attraction and retention of course, but one of the biggest drivers of retention is leadership and accountability within a culture. Until leaders start turning inwards and reflecting on their own behaviors, stop leading from a place of their own fears and insecurities, start setting expectations upfront with employees, have open, direct and honest conversations, address issues immediately, focus on removing roadblocks for employees to get their jobs done instead of creating more roadblocks, and ultimately be objective enough to support their development and career progression (including giving the tough feedback with their best interest at heart), then the revolving door of talent will continue to become an even larger problem for organizations.

Kerrie Campbell

Is Quiet Quitting and Quiet Firing really a new phenomenon? LinkedIn Article. September 10, 2022.

Listen to everyone in your company

Listen to everyone in your company. And figure out ways to get them talking. The folks on the front lines - the ones who actually talk to the customer - are the only ones who really know what's going on out there. You'd better find out what they know. This really is what total quality is all about. To push responsibility down in your organization, and to force good ideas to bubble up within it, you must listen to what your associates are trying to tell you.

Sam Walton

Sam Walton, Made in America by Sam Walton & John Huey. Bantam Books. 1992. p. 248

we make a decision

Our Friday merchandising meeting is unique to retailing as far as I can tell. Here we have all these regional managers who have been out in the field all week long - they are the operations guys who direct the running of the stores. Then you have all your merchandising folks back in Bentonville - the people who buy for the stores. In retailing, there has always been a traditional, head-to-head confrontation between operations and merchandising. You know, the operations guys say, 'Why in the world would anybody buy this? It's a dog, and we'll never sell it.' Then the merchandising folks say, 'There's nothing wrong with that item. If you guys were smart enough to display it well and promote it properly, it would blow out the doors.' That's the way it is everywhere, including Wal-Mart. So we sit all these folks down together every Friday at the same table and just have at it.

We get into some of the doggonedest, knock-down drag-outs you have ever seen. But we have a rule. We never leave an item hanging. We will make a decision in that meeting even if it's wrong, and sometimes it is. But when the people come out of that room, you would be hard-pressed to tell which ones oppose it and which ones are for it. And once we've made that decision on Friday, we expect it to be acted on in all the stores on Saturday. What we guard against around here is people saying, 'Let's think about it.' We make a decision. Then we act on it."

David Glass

Sam Walton, Made in America by Sam Walton & John Huey. Bantam Books. 1992. p. 225, 226

drivers see more stores

Our drivers really are extremely loyal to their mission, which is to serve the stores. They report back to Wal-Mart continually on things like merchandise thrown out behind the store that looked like it was good, attitude and morale problems in the stores. For a log, long time, Sam would show up regularly in the drivers' break room at 4 A.M. with a bunch of doughnuts and just sit there for a couple of hours talking to them.

He grilled them. 'What are you seeing at the stores?' 'Have you been to that store lately?' 'How do the people act there?' 'Is it getting better?' It makes sense. The drivers see more stores every week than anybody else in this company. And I think what Sam likes about them is that they're not like a lot of managers. They don't care who you are. They'll tell you what they really think.

Lee Scott

Sam Walton, Made in America by Sam Walton & John Huey. Bantam Books. 1992. p. 210