Your new post is loading...
|Rescooped by Kenneth Mikkelsen from Management Books: MANAGEMENT DESIGN and THE PERFORMANCE TRIANGLE|
Resources on Diagnostic Mentoring: Managing in Turbulent Times by Lukas Michel. This is some of the most interesting work being done in reinventing organizations. Via this link you'll find articles from conference presentation, publications and papers.
I also encourage you to read Lukas' books:
Business is broken, with engagement and trust at an all-time low. A radically different way of thinking and acting, which focuses on people as the source of value, is needed.
This article in HR Magazine is written by Vlatka Hlupic, the author of The Management Shift: How to Harness the Power of People and Transform Your Organization For Sustainable Success.
I strongly encourage you to read Vlatka's excellent book. You can also follow her on Twitter here: @ManagementShift.
How do you measure a CEO’s impact? An HBR team recently addressed that question by ranking CEOs according to the increases their companies have seen in total shareholder return and market capitalization across their whole tenures.
The raking from HBR illustrates that social relevance must be taken into account when you measure a CEO’s impact.
Companies need to understand what value they are creating, not only for their investors, but also for their employees, customers, and society at large – and they need to know how their reputations reflect this net value creation.
We find ourselves at a stage between The Industrial Age and The Network Age, which is hardly breaking news to anyone; but recent years have accelerated the interconnected shifts. So why is it that we as human beings continue to pursue strategies that we know are wrong? Why is it that we fail to change our course?
The scene in The Matrix illustrates the difficult choice that business leaders face nowadays. Do you acknowledge the new reality and adapt to it? Or do you choose to carry on with the same mindset, skills, behavior and organizational culture, knowing that it will potentially damage your future existence?
Many of our assumptions of globalization are formed by personal bias and public opinions that are expressed without substantiated data. As a result, executives lean towards dangerously flawed decision-making too often and pursue global one-size-fits-all strategies.
In an interview with Pankaj Ghemawat, one of the world’s most accomplished business professors and global strategists back in 2011, I asked him to elaborate on the current state of globalization and the implications for executives who have to navigate through a heavy fog of misinformation. The points that Ghemawat made during the interview are still valid today.
Everybody loves self-improvement. We want to get smarter, network better, be connected, balance our lives, and so on. That’s why we’re such avid consumers of “top 10” lists of things to do to be a more effective, productive, promotable, mindful — you name it — leader. We read all the lists, but we have trouble sticking to the “easy steps” because while we all want the benefits of change, we rarely ever want to do the hard work of change.
Think of self-improvement as play, not work.
In the 18th annual PwC survey of chief executive officers, conducted in 2014, many CEOs anticipated significant disruptions to their businesses during the next five years as a result of external worldwide trends. One such trend, cited by 61 percent of the respondents, was an increasing number of competitors. The same number of respondents foresaw changes in customer behavior creating disruption. Fifty percent said they expected changes in distribution channels. As CEOs look to stay ahead of these trends, they recognize the need to change the organization’s design. But for that redesign to be successful, a company must make its changes as effectively and painlessly as possible, in a way that aligns with its strategy, invigorates employees, builds distinctive new capabilities, and makes it easier to attract customers.
These fundamental guidelines, drawn from experience, can help you reshape your organization to fit your business strategy.
You might learn a great deal in school, but it’s doubtful that you’ll actually develop as a leader by reading a book or taking a course. The military is right about experiential development: People grow and become leaders by making a commitment to a cause, and having personal responsibility and accountability.
For those of us in civilian life, there are also ways for us to develop as leaders through experience: through volunteer service. There are myriad nonprofit missions from which to choose, roles and positions in which to engage that are meaningful and productive, and paths for personal and professional advancement.
Great leaders choose their leadership style like a golfer chooses his or her club, with a calculated analysis of the matter at hand, the end goal and the best tool for the job.
Here are the six leadership styles Goleman uncovered among the managers he studied, as well as a brief analysis of the effects of each style on the corporate climate:
A 2008 Harvard Business Review survey involving 125,000 participants at companies in more than 50 countries found that three out of every five companies surveyed rated their organizations as weak at execution. This sounds shocking. But understanding why so many managers have such little faith in their organizations’ ability to execute strategies isn’t hard if you look in the right place.
When it comes to what executives think matters most to the bottom line, it is clearly time for some attitude adjustments.
Nearly all CEOs today invest in leadership. And yet, after decades of sustained research on the topic, these investments typically lead to questionable results rather than clearly improved levels of leadership.
As The Conference Board put it in 2008, “The study and practice of leadership and leadership development continues to be a work in progress, albeit one that shows frustratingly little progress.”
In many cases, leaders simply don’t see the significant value lost when employees fail to adopt desired behaviours or choose to adopt them incompletely. Despite all that’s been said about the importance of behaviour in recent years, most executives continue to dismiss it as “soft stuff.”
Most workplaces face constant imperatives for change - from trivial-seeming matters such as installing new office printers to major ones such as implementing new policies to support diversity. The question of how to drive change, though, is perennially vexing.
It’s no surprise that people resist organizational change - they are overworked and overburdened, and simply don’t have the bandwidth to embrace change. Further, they rely on habits and routines to help them meet their own work demands, and so change - which disrupts those habits and routines, and forces people to engage in new, active, and energy-demanding ways - appears highly undesirable.
An effective strategy for creating change requires several elements, but one of the most important is to convince people to alter their attitudes—to move from rejection to openness, at least, or embrace, at best. If you can create change in people’s attitudes, it’s much easier to change their behavior.
But you need to know where people's OK Zone is first and foremost.
Advancement in digital technologies has disrupted everything, including leadership styles.
Employees want more ownership rather than to follow instruction; customers want to participate in the marketing and development process; and leaders are finding that open and agile organizations are able to maneuver more effectively than organizations where all insight and direction comes from the top. In short, the autocratic Commander, whether brilliant or misguided, just won’t cut it anymore.
What has changed in the last 20-30 years to require new ways of leading?
Technological advancement has created a ripple effect that is transforming the market. Today’s digital technologies — social, cloud, big data analytics, mobile and the Internet of everything — have created new, intangible, sources of value, such as relationships and information that are delivered by new business models.
Along with the new sources of value, customers and employees’ wants and needs have evolved as digital technologies have created new ways of interacting with businesses.
The most effective leaders understand that problem solving is not a "one-size-fits-all" process. They know that their actions depend on the situation, and they make better decisions by adapting their approach to changing circumstances.
But how do you know which approach you should use in a particular situation? And how can you avoid making the wrong decision?
Though it may be particularly hard for leaders to embrace uncertainty after years of being taught to display confidence, there is a clear business benefit in doing so. Research has shown that over-confident CEOs make overly risky decisions, often at the expense of their shareholders. Leaders who are able to come to terms with uncertainty and communicate it to employees may avoid such bad decisions.
Confidence always looks good, but it doesn’t always work. In the long term, honesty is the only sustainable strategy.
Rather than fooling themselves, or us, we should want our leaders to represent the truth, even when it makes their jobs harder. That is, after all, one of the great missions to which we entrust them: to take the complex information and broad vantage point to which they have access and convey it to the rest of us in a useful way. Doing so represents authentic and courageous leadership, even if it means being less certain.
A glance at today’s headlines leaves little doubt that we have entered a new era of geopolitical turbulence. Acts of terror and violence, humanitarian crises, and public health emergencies are rarely localized events. Instead, these shocks transcend borders, presenting global challenges. Just as one crisis fades, another rises to take its place.
Stability, resilience, and relationships are the keys to thriving amid geopolitical crises.
Barraged by lists of predictions, trends, and otherwise guesses. Swaddled in our own strategic plans. Yet, 2015 won’t conform neatly to our organizational goals and expectations — to succeed, we must learn to adapt ourselves and our organizations to the unforeseen events that will undoubtedly shape the year ahead.
We live now in a world that is far more connected, frenetic, and unpredictable than ever before. A world that will outpace us, outwit us, belie our expectations, and make fools of our best laid plans — that is, if we don’t learn to adapt ourselves and our organizations.
I encourage you to have a look at Bud Caddell's organization, NOBL, here.
Literature around leadership is not hard to come by, but there are few texts that examine the process of leadership from where it begins – in the leader’s mind.
In this article from European Business Review Nathan Harter analyses how great leaders have embraced the often complex multiplicity of their decisions and so brought coherence to their leadership.
The deep changes necessary to accelerate progress against society's most intractable problems require a unique type of leader - the system leader, a person who catalyzes collective leadership.
At no time in history have we needed such system leaders more. We face a host of systemic challenges beyond the reach of existing institutions and their hierarchical authority structures. Problems like climate change, destruction of ecosystems, growing scarcity of water, youth unemployment, and embedded poverty and inequity require unprecedented collaboration among different organizations, sectors, and even countries. Sensing this need, countless collaborative initiatives have arisen in the past decade - locally, regionally, and even globally. Yet more often than not they have floundered - in part because they failed to foster collective leadership within and across the collaborating organizations.
We are at the beginning of the beginning in learning how to catalyze and guide systemic change at a scale commensurate with the scale of problems we face.
In this article Peter Senge, Hal Hamilton and John Kania share their insights on the system leaders needed to foster collective leadership.
According to the authors there are three core capabilities that system leaders must develop in order to foster collective leadership:
1. The ability to see the larger system.
2. The ability to foster reflection and more generative conversations.
3. The ability to shift the collective focus from reactive problem solving to co-creating the future.
The authors cover a lot of ground in the article. Here are a few points:
"Peacekeeping circles" used by Roca and the dialogue interviews conducted by Winslow.
“Peer shadowing" means that a person accompanies somebody for a defined period of time to observe him/her during work and learn from this observation.
"Learning Journeys" allow participants to move into unfamiliar environments, immerse themselves in different contexts and step into relevant experiences.
"Dialogue interviews" engage the interviewee in a reflective and generative conversation. This tool can be used to prepare for projects, workshops, or capacity building programs.
I recommend that you look at some of the tools on Presencing Institute's (Otto Scharmer and Theory U) website here.