Tag Archives: Management

Too Much? Technology Intrusion @SXSW

The Washington Post, reporting from Austin, provided coverage of South by Southwest 2012. While there were certainly gadgets galore, applications abounding, and technology that teased, today’s article brought up the premise that technology threatens the fabric of our relationships. The intrusion of interruptive “advances” can overwhelm the brain, says Amber Case, a cyborg anthropologist.

Avi Zev Weider offered a documentary for screening, “Welcome to the Machine,” that attempted to ask the question of how inter-human relationships are compromised. Similar to the Matrix film series, there was a strong undercurrent that the network is not always our friend and we need downtime, to unplug and be human and regenerate.

How does this vein of thought factor into our office environments? The tyranny of emails, interoffice communications, tweets, posts, etc can overwhelm even the most resolute worker. I’ve been in many businesses wherein the employees–even department heads–are afraid to walk away from their desks for fear that they may receive a communication to which they do not have the opportunity to respond in real time.

There is something inherently wrong with being captive to the powerful tools that were created–ostensibly–to make our lives better. In working with employees in a number of companies, I have given the employees permission to work strategically on projects, check their messages according to a predetermined schedule, and enjoy the resulting focus, clarity, and peace of mind.

In my own life, it can be harder to set the smartphone down when I know someone may try to communicate with me. The Tweets, email messages on my work email, emails on my home email, text messages from family & friends, alerts that I’ve set up to keep the day flowing, blog updates, LinkedIn updates, etc just keep rolling in and it can be soooo seductive to allow the flow to determine my pace and disposition.

What can we collectively do? Simple, purposeful choices can break the habitual “checking in” that can be so distracting. Determine when you will pick up your cell–make it less frequent than you’ve been observing. Schedule email reading and response time. Most importantly–schedule “think” and “rest” times. Without them, our collective quality of life, contentment on and off the job, and health–physical and emotional–will all suffer.

Spring Colds and Business Lethargy

Have you ever battled one of those seasonal colds that seems to set in just as the quarter changes? The kind that start out innocuously and, within a day or two, take over your body are the worst. With a stopped-up head, compounded by the medicine-induced slowdown of brain activity, perhaps a headache…you simply feel immobilized. Try as one might, even simple tasks require Herculean effort. Truly demanding focus–be it mental, emotional, or physical–wears out and leaves us exhausted.

In business settings, we can experience the onset of lethargy similar to the seasonal cold in cycles not unlike the changing of the seasons. Consider: when you finish your busiest season of the year, the week or so following can be extremely slow and unproductive; or a project comes to a close and your team is worn out; or your work group has just added a lot of new staff and some of your job is now done by others. While all of these situations seem to describe events that lead to a lack of work, what else can lead to job boredom?

Underemployment is a huge contributor to work environments in which employees (and management!) is under-motivated. How does this occur? Usually, when we take a position with an organization, we agree to a certain job description, rate of compensation and benefits package. However, we rarely talk about the career path, opportunity for advancement, and milestones that trigger promotion. If these items are discussed, they are discussed on the front end briefly because we read that we should. How can we keep the topic matter “front and center” throughout our relationship with an employer?

Much of it boils down to culture. Does your organization have intentionality/purposefulness about its culture? Is it “tuned in” to the needs of its employees, or only looking out for shareholder interests? While financial and accounting textbooks encourage us to only think about the “bottom line,” we all know that boring workplaces can be a downer and that culturally blase organizations lose talent, customers, and market share in the long term.

Either join a group that has a culture that values the employee, or be a change agent to help it become such! Speak with your supervisor, HR contact, etc about ideas that you have to enhance employee engagement. It has been our experience that, in many cases, executives have not only heard about progressive corporate cultures within their industry, but would like to have a reason to begin migrating in that direction. Keep in mind–“baby steps” are still walking! Perhaps you will be asked to join or facilitate an employee group to explore ways to make your office a better place to work. If so, you can escape the lethargy and begin to enjoy your avocation. Congrats to all who dare to embark on the journey from “medicine head” to lucidity!

Float Like a Butterfly, Sting Like a…?

In watching the rerun of “Ali” over the weekend, I was transfixed by the man on a mission, the fighter originally known as Cassius Clay. Muhammad Ali was motivated by multiple factors. He fought for Allah…for the repressed…for black men and women who yearned to be free…for his own self-worth. Stronger, more experienced fighters were knocked down and out time and again by this focused innovator of the boxing ring. Ali had the incredible footwork that made him elusive and seemingly able to “float like a butterfly.” Added to the footwork, he had a lethal left hand that, in his words, “stung like a bee.” This formidable combination proved almost unstoppable throughout a career that spanned a couple of decades.

In what ways is a prizefighter like a business executive? There’s the obvious–not everyone will agree with your beliefs and practices. Sometimes, we are called to make a stand on a life issue that is much bigger than ourselves or event the moment of competition. For many, a career pursuit is an opportunity to find fulfillment as we exercise our gifts and abilities and hope that our contribution to society has been positive and enduring.

But, beyond the esoteric comparisons, what else can we as business leaders derive from Ali and his legacy? He came into boxing at a time when standing toe-to-toe and slugging the other fighter into submission was the conventional wisdom. What did he do differently? He changed the game! By incorporating speedy footwork designed to force others to come to him, emphasizing endurance, and furious arm/hand speed, Muhammad Ali demonstrated that brute force could be overcome, just as other methods of warfare have been replaced over time. The “sting” of Ali was his counterpunching capability–to absorb what the competition threw his way, and to come back with a vengeance and knockout blow to the head.

In what ways have you undertaken a game-changing strategy? When your industry, product, service, talent, etc would dictate the terms to you, do you roll over and take it? Or, do you devise a unique approach that suits your unique competitive advantage and exploit it to gain an upper hand? Are you daring in the face of such long odds? Most of the innovators of our time have been

As to your counterpunch, do you have what it takes to observe the competition’s best effort, take it in stride, and initiate your own offensive? Does it deliver a “sting?” Or, is it benign and overlooked for lack of potency? Arise and conquer! Find a way to “punch” back when your adversary is resting on laurels. Develop your own effective means to TKO them and win your prize.

May you develop the knack to float like a butterfly and sting like a…

 

Tsunami On Hold

In a recent article, “Six Reasons the Tidal Wave of Business Transitions Has NOT Happened,” Wayne Rivers of The Family Business Institute in Raleigh NC suggests why the huge predicted transfer of closely held business ownership and management has not occurred. He writes of delayed retirement, lack of specific vision for retirement, and inability to sell the businesses as key factors. The result is that the outcomes anticipated have been put on hold–but it’s still a question of when and not if.

We concur with Mr. Rivers’ assessment that most businesses are not ready for sale. Some do not generate enough top line revenues; others do not create enough earnings/profits. As we have mentioned in prior posts, a critical part of any business–be it a family-owned one or professional services firm, or any of a myriad of other combinations–is the executive acumen of the team leading the business. If too many decisions are made by to few people, the business is flat out worth less money. Since the person/people selling are planning an exit, what executive prowess exists prior to the sale either will not persist in the near term or soon thereafter. Any buyer studying this phenomenon would have to be wary of buying a controlling position or entire company under these conditions. The buyers, in most cases, do NOT want to manage the company; they want a qualified team in place who can manage it well on their behalf.

When privately held business owners recognize this major hurdle, they can begin to devise a way to leap over it. Often, the advice of a consultant or coach can help in multiple ways. First, by preparing the management team to grow in their authority and decision-making. (The team must, of course, be committed to stay as well.) Secondly, the senior and retiring leaders can be coached to build a new future for themselves that is challenging and rewarding. Finally, a plan can be developed that takes into consideration how to prepare the various stakeholders for the transition to come.

For those who prepare their business systematically for sale, there is better news on the horizon. Private equity groups have money to invest, are paying more than they have in four years, and are looking for opportunities to build a segment presence through roll-ups or narrowly focused portfolios. According to a mergermarket.com report last year, 19% of deals were in industrials and chemicals, 18% in services, and 15% in technology, media and telecommunications in the twelve month lookback period.

In the same mergermarket report, private equity executives said that inadequate management reporting was a top problem 47% of the time and management capability limitations 33% of the time. Shore up your management methods! Prepare to ride the tidal wave of interest in buying private companies as an outcome of the hard work you perform to get your leadership team up to speed to lead without you.

 

 

One-man rule vs. One-man band

Businesses often can be managed by a strong leader who seems to be involved with every significant decision. In some cases, this type of one-man band is almost unavoidable (e.g. a company with less than five employees, four of whom are in support roles.) However, in organizations that have been fortunate to grow, add management teams, and have complex issues, the controlling leader can either be an icon or an albatross. When is it good–and when is it bad–that the proverbial “buck” stops on one person’s desk?

art by Eldon Doty

 

Chief executives who make decisions without the input of colleagues engage in one-man rule. This practice is a two-edged sword. While few will argue that group management can slow progress and that one can move more nimbly than many, there is always the latent risk that decisions that are made lack depth, insight, and the benefit of buy-in. The biggest travesty of the urge to “go it alone” is that it undermines management succession by depriving others from the opportunity to make meaningful choice on behalf of the enterprise.

Management depth is always in the list of prime characteristics of best managed companies. Management change then, by default, becomes a disorderly process, at times exacerbated by recession or prosperity. The entire organization is often thrown into chaotic operation and often requires a turnaround thereafter.

Instead of putting one’s peers–and, perhaps, one’s own retirement via earnout/sale–at risk, better to avoid one-man rule and seek to engage others. This concept holds true in may of the sexy technology start-up models as well, wherein the “one-man” is equivalent to the group of initial founders who can function as to inhibit the contribution of successive hires. Often, these top executives are extremely bright and have a very high IQ, but lack the EQ (emotional quotient = emotional intelligence) to build out the model and achieve the important milestones due to an unwillingness to invite the input of others.

More to come on how to build out the management team and empower them to make meaningful contributions…