by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Feb 28, 2020 | Brazen Leader, Miscellaneous Business Topics, Uncategorized
Consultants have been around for a long time. Some would argue we’re the second-oldest profession; others may even make some snide, not-so-humorous analogies to the oldest profession.
Ok, some of those are humorous…
Regardless, advisers have been “advising” leaders for thousands of years. Not all “advisers,” however, are created equal. And here’s a key – merely belonging to an important tribe, club, or company doesn’t make the advice any better.
A story…
Almost 2,500 years ago, there was a King called Xerxes, intent on destroying those pesky Greeks and their armies. Surprisingly, the Greeks took exception to this, and were quite formidable opponents.
Just as the King was preparing for a big battle, there was a total solar eclipse. Today, we grab the kids, rush outside and say “ooh,”and “aaah;” 2,000 years ago, people ran inside screaming “oh shit, the world is ending!”
Anyway, King Xerxes needed advice about this new development. Not having a resident expert on staff, he brought in his consultant – called then, a “Magi.” Think modern-day McKinsey by lineage…
Xerxe’s Magi analyzed the eclipse (undoubtedly with PowerPoint slides and 4-square models), and advised the King that he should proceed post-haste with his battle. This Magi foreshadowed a great victory for King Xerxes.
King Xerxes, of course, had his butt handed to him by the Greeks. It wasn’t pretty.
I’m certain the Magi, probably on retainer, had good reasons for this marked lapse in effective counsel.
Why does this matter to you? Simple: be cautious from whom you accept counsel. You didn’t get where you are today by buying snake oil, so don’t by it now when you get advice that (a) doesn’t seem logically thought out, (b) comes from someone who’s biggest or only credential is his or her “tribe,” and/or (c) if it just doesn’t pass your “sniff” test.
Adviser, consultant, consigliere, Magi… these have long been trusted positions of influence in Kingdoms, companies, and mafias (I leave it to you to decide which is yours); they have a place, and are frequently a huge asset to our success.
Use care, however, when selecting.
Be Brazen.
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Jan 30, 2020 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement
“Yes” men, “No” men, or some happy medium?? (“men” used for convenience, and is in no way gender-specific)…
Do we want our closest and/or brightest to agree with us, butter us up, lick our boots, kiss our derrière or any of a dozen other euphemisms for sucking up merely because it was our idea?
Or are we actively seeking constructive, challenging dialog??
Must we always have complete, obedient agreeance (not sure that’s a real word, but my baby sister Elizabeth always used it, so here it is), or do we really want diversity of thought?
Personally, I believe that when reasonably intelligent, well-intentioned people disagree, the final outcome or decision is always – ALWAYS – a better one.
Further, I’ll also opine that “diversity of thought,” particularly in leadership decision-making, is one of the only valid business cases for intentional, purposeful “diversity” in an organization.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it…
And let’s be clear: I’m not talking about that crap-magnet Joe/Jane pain-in-the-butt employee who always disagrees, simply for the sake of disagreeing. Nor am I referring to those schmucks among us who are simply rabble-rousers looking for attention via a cause they can denigrate.
No, those are simply toxic jerks, and, like Bob, we should fire the a$$holes.
I’m talking about smart, well-intentioned people disagreeing and able to substantiate their disagreement with logic, data, and thought, sans logic’s evil twin, emotion.
I believe it’s a good thing. So, how do we get it to happen? Well, I’ll tell you how…
First, you must provide a safe forum. There must be an accepted arena, vehicle, or secret handshake, code-word, or ring-knocking ceremony where those with contrarian views know they can share.
And don’t be shy – advertise this forum.
Next, like birth control, there has to be a “safety-first” mentality. Those who may disagree must know (not just hear) that their well-thought, well-intentioned disagreement is welcome – in fact, expected – in the course of regular dialog. And that they won’t get shot between the eyes for doing so.
Finally, it’s gotta matter. Naysayers, contrarians, devil’s advocates – whatever the name – have to see their push-back accepted as input and occasionally alter decision-making some of the time if you really want it to continue.
Being “accepting” is good, but not good enough. You’ve got to be prepared to actually use their unpopular inputs. Go figure…
I once worked with a CEO who would frequently tell me that “If you and I always agree, one of us in unnecessary, and I’m keeping my job.”
Early diversity at its best. Thanks, Russ.
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Dec 18, 2019 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement, Miscellaneous Business Topics, Organizational Effectiveness
Another year in the books (or the cloud, or wherever we store history these days). In 2019, we worked with executives in healthcare, technology, contact centers, financial services, higher education and more, and we’ve helped them become better leaders who developed more leaders. Along the way, we had the privilege to help their organizations grow, transform and improve, and in doing so, we saw some noteworthy trends we thought we’d share with you. If any of these sound familiar, learn vicariously from the collective and use this as a catalyst for improvement.
We’re all people first. Relationships before processes. Relationships instead of processes. It’s intuitive that employees do better when change is their idea; we’ve learned that the same thing holds true for the consultant-client relationship. More shut-up, more listen.
Leadership is a contact sport. We’re all busy with a host of really important organizational and administrative tasks, but if you’re in a leadership position, leading is your primary job and not an additional duty. It’s not that idiotic term “soft-skill” if it’s the one you need to do your basic job. You can keep busy staying in your office, but you can’t develop authentic, trusting relationships with those you lead from there. Don’t let busyness become an excuse for half-hearted leadership.
Even the best need help. Michael Jordan had a coach. Tiger Woods had a coach (back when he was good; now… who knows? ???? ). Tom Brady and LeBron James have coaches. Sheryl Sandberg, Jeff Bezos and Sundar Pichai have coaches — even Oprah Winfrey has one. 40% of Fortune 500 CEOs fail within 18 months; 82% of them because of relationships. This isn’t a push for our executive coaching services; it’s a reminder (from our clients) that even those we consider superstars “need someone.” They need help to grow, develop, and continue their superstar status. Leading at the top is hard stuff, and having someone to advise and counsel — and just listen sometimes — is crucial.
Leadership development isn’t an event; it’s a process. If your leadership development program is solely an HR-led, one-and-done training seminar, you’re doing it wrong. It’s just not effective. Top leadership support for development is essential, and only individuals at the highest organizational levels can create a climate that encourages a continuous learning environment.
Often, you have to choose sides. Leadership—and consulting—has risks. In this profession, too many try to be all things to all people, tripping over non-committal PC verbiage. We must stop. Sometimes we have to tell the CEO that the SVP of Operations has the better plan to consider. It’s what’s best for the client that must always drive our actions, advice and counsel.
We can do two things at once. No, no one is advocating individual multi-tasking, but organizational multi-tasking is a must. We simply cannot focus on just one strategy, direction or objective. We must have the leadership bandwidth to move multiple objectives forward while still dealing with the occasional organizational fire.
Process cannot overcome culture. There is no single 12-page Guide to Leadership; if there were, I’d have written it, become a kazillionaire with my own island and you wouldn’t be invited. If an outfit’s culture is not conducive to, say, empowered decision-making, then for Pete’s sake don’t allow some outside consultant to teach or coach on empowerment or high-level delegation. Work on the culture first, then use leadership “pull” instead of consultant “push” to marshal through necessary objectives and behavior changes.
Talk’s cheap; meaningful conversations are priceless. Most senior leadership teams declare themselves to be great communicators… and they’re usually not. Not with each other or their employees. Think about the conversations you have around the conference room table. Are they about hard things, or are they guarded to ensure everyone “gets along?” Trust is never built hiding behind the thin veneer of playing nice; it requires authentic and meaningful conversations. Collaboration and deference look a lot alike. They aren’t.
Don’t stop doing what works. We saw this so many times in 2019 that we felt compelled to remind you. If you’ve changed a process (or put a new one into place) to correct a problem, don’t quit following it when the problem goes away. That’s like stopping your blood pressure medicine because your blood pressure isn’t high anymore. It’s hard enough to implement a new process and get it to stick; having to do it twice is self-induced suffering.
Check your ego at the door. When leaders let their ego influence decisions, they become deaf to the messages their behavior conveys, and blind to how others perceive those messages. Ego is the major culprit behind leaders who won’t admit they might have been wrong or refuse to show vulnerability. When the little green monster keeps us from making good objective decisions, we lose trust not only from those affected but also from those who watched – and don’t even think no one was watching.
I can only imagine what I’ll learn from my clients in 2020.
Be Brazen.
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Nov 6, 2019 | Brazen Leader, Kevin Berchelmann
Once again, the spotlight continues to shine brightly on senior executives. Not that it shouldn’t, mind you, but some focus is deserved — some may not be.
For instance, we’ve all heard about Bob Nardelli’s $210M “severance” from Home Depot, amid falling stock prices. What you have to dig to discover, of course, is that Bob was #2 or #3 behind Welch at GE, in line for succession. When Immelt got the nod (deservedly), Nardelli and a couple of others “passed over” sought and accepted CEO jobs elsewhere. Not uncommon in the world of succession, is it??
So, to entice Nardelli to join HD, the board offered him hiring incentives — that’s right, hiring incentives — of about $180M in stock, options, deferred comp, and retirement benefits. So, $180M of this so-called “severance was, in fact, a sign-on bonus to entice Nardelli to leave an incredible opportunity and security at GE.
$20M was pure “severance,” and over $18M was in exchange for promises not to compete or poach employees/customers. Money well spent.
Get your facts straight, media.
Then, there’s Lawrence Jackson at Wal-Mart. Hired as HR chief a couple of years ago, he led global procurement and apparently didn’t quite “get it” regarding Wal-Mart’s cost reduction strategy. Jackson marks the 4th — count ’em, FOUR — senior executive to get whacked at Wal-Mart in less than a few months.
So, how about that pressure? Challenger, Gray, and Cristmas’ annual survey shows CEO departures at almost 1,500 for 2006. Almost a third has less than 3 years, and over 10% had less than a year.
Cushy job, eh??
Stay the course. The race is won by those who stay focused and don’t get caught up in things that don’t matter.
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Oct 28, 2019 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement, Kevin Berchelmann, Organizational Effectiveness
Our folks make mistakes.
I know, that’s heresy, but it’s still true. We make mistakes all the time, we can only assume that the people working for us do as well.
So, when they do make that mistake, what do we do? Whack ’em immediately? Beat ’em up about it? Public humiliation?
How about, “Complete unequivocal support.”
WHAT??? You say…?
Now, of course I’m assuming that the mistake we are discussing isn’t patently illegal or unethical, and that it’s not so incredibly egregious as to start a trend of stupidity throughout the organization… so, given those broad parameters, how about we make this a learning event by:
1. Acknowledging the mistake. Let the employee or manager know that you know, and that we need to find a satisfactory way to get past the mistake.
2. Allow the employee or manager to find and/or create the resolution for the mistake, and
3. Support the manager publicly with his actions. Don’t torpedo a manager to his subordinates; when they come to you talking about the dumb decisions, claim ignorance of all the facts and circumstances, and state clearly — unequivocally — that you support the manager’s decision. If they have any issue with that, recommend they take it up with that manager.
After all, defending a wrong decision, or accepting responsibility for its correction, is part of management maturity, and needs to be learned through experience.
Let’s don’t cheat our folks out of our support, nor the opportunity to learn from mistakes. After all, as the old saw goes, they are the best teacher…
Besides, if they then make that mistake again, we can kill ’em with a clear conscience…
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Sep 27, 2019 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement, Miscellaneous Business Topics, Organizational Effectiveness
Not too long ago, I worked with a group of executives for a fast-growing client.
Two things struck me as interesting, and somewhat of a paradox: First, they were all reasonably successful in their jobs (and their jobs were substantially the same, just different geographic regions). Second, they were all incredibly different. Yes, they each had similar core characteristics, such as intelligence and work ethic. In other areas, such as sales, marketing, people management, organizational skills, strategy, planning, and so forth, they were all over the charts.
So what? Well, I’ll tell you “so what.” You hear a lot about understanding your “strengths and weaknesses,” then you’re supposed to work on your weaknesses, right?? Sort of like the big Superdude combating kryptonite, right??
Bunk.
Let’s look at it differently. Let’s assume that succeeding in a position can be done in any of several different ways, using a variety of skills. With that reasoning, you don’t have strengths and weaknesses; you have learned skills and skills you have yet to learn.
Wow!
So, then, we should then simply “learn more skills,” right??
No, no, no…
We should, instead, clearly identify our skills, since we know that we can succeed with them, and work on improving our strengths! That’s right, improve our strengths, since we already know that they work for us. Learning new skills is time consuming, and depending on application, may or may not work for us the way they work for others.
Now, this logic assumes current success, so don’t confuse this with those managers who are clearly unsuccessful, though I would argue this could help them with their improvement also. In other words, as Bum Phillips (retired Houston Oilers coach) would say, “Dance with who brung you.”
Use the skills you have — improve and hone them to a razor’s edge — and continue your increasing levels of success. Over time, identify some additional skills you would like to pick up, and develop a plan to learn them in a reasonable time and fashion.
But don’t break what works…
Be Brazen.
