Leadership - The Peggy Noonan Way

Wow - my apologies to my regular readers - it's been some time. Hopefully, you receive this via RSS feed, so you'll appreciate my selective posts. I've got quite a few things that I'd like to comment on within the coming weeks, but #1 on this the list is this OpEd from Peggy Noonan --> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704415104576066180967679912.html In "The Captain and the King", Peggy discusses leadership, and I love it:

It's a great mistake when you are in a leadership position to want to be like everyone else. Because that, actually, is not your job. Your job is to be better, and to set standards that those below you have to reach to meet. And you have to do this even when it's hard, even when you know you yourself don't quite meet the standards you represent. A Captain has to be a Captain.

Being great requires sacrifice, and often, leadership is not a choice. You are "thrust upon it". How do you handle those situations? If you can plan for those - and I think you can - you need to be ready to take the reins in a big way when you have an organization in need.

Pitfalls of the "High Potential"

Please forgive the posting delay, there have been a variety of great topics worthy of mention here, but time has been tight. After a recent review of The Conference Board website however, I wanted to share a great article on career growth, from two IMD professors.

Article here --> http://budurl.com/HiPoArticle

The unfortunate truth is that often academics miss critical nuances around how the real world operates, but I found their insights spot on. Since you can read the article yourself, I wanted to pull out some nuggets within their commentary that I found most useful:

1) Cultivate the most productive working relationship with your boss. Although this goes without saying, it can be an easy one to forget -- particularly if your timeframe in a specific role is "temporary". Understanding preconceived notions -- from your manager, your counterparts, and subordinates -- can help you address them and add value more quickly.

2) Managing a sense of "entitlement" -- in both yourself and others. This is funny (and a little sad at the same time), but research indicates that "the current generation’s mean narcissism score approaches that of a celebrity sample of movie stars, reality TV contestants, and famous musicians". Do you have an inflated sense of self-importance, and is it impacting the perception that others have about you?

3) The "temporary" assignment mindset. I alluded to this one earlier, but unfortunately, many companies design assignments (and incentives) in a way that prevents an employee from ultimately being accountable for the decisions that they make. This happens in job rotations and can also happen in situations like merger integrations or other extraordinary events. As the authors allude -- this not only impacts business results -- it can impact morale and social interaction when people are disconnected from the consequences of their decisions/behavior.

Building a Better Network

Read a really great article in yesterday's WSJ on "How to Be a Smart Protege", which presented some excellent ideas - for anyone trying to develop a mentoring relationship - or frankly any type of professional relationship. Some of the key concepts and the ideas presented are recounted here.

Key concepts:
1) Don't seek just one mentor, seek many. Build a "developmental network".
2) "Relationally savvy" individuals are very good at building these networks - and we can learn from them.

"Savvys" are successful because they:

• Aren't shy about initiating and maintaining contact with people that can support their development.
• Are expert at recognizing when colleagues are interested in becoming mentors
• Put a lot of work in at the start of a relationship with a mentor to make sure it is successful
• Come prepared for meetings with their mentor, and follow up/keep them up-to-date
• Share information -- they are open, sharing, and trusting
• Make it mutual - good mentees find ways to add value to the relationship
• Are personable - they're simply easy to get along with
• Have a positive attitude - see relationships as an opportunity to "build bridges"

Anyway, take the time to read this one. There's great advice in there for mentees, mentors, and anyone that could be more thoughtful about the value that they give to and receive from others.

LINK: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203937504574252141852898888.html

Recommendations to CMOs

Greg Welch, a consummate marketer (who happens to place CMOs), has the following advice... which I mention later rather than sooner as I get back on track with my postings....

Courtesy of Ad Age (1/26/09 - ok I'm digging through old piles):

• Lead from the Front "Reassure your team of the broader mission, progress to date, and plans for the future....Obviously, honest and authentic leadership works best."
• Be a Translator "Explain your agenda & determine how you can deliver tangible business value -- inspire trust & build trust, you need everyone's support. This sounds trite, but assess the value of the CMO role, and leverage it!
• Tap into the wisdom of your firm. Innovation happens from within -- it's just a function of your ability to listen. If you ignore the thoughts of others -- it's YOUR loss.
• Knock on the CEOs Door - Candid assessments from the King are always key - ensure your vision is the same, your career depends upon it.
• Take calculated risks. "Great CMOs take action." Move quickly - pick a pilot to champion, and move from there...

On the Fed, the Crisis, and Leadership

In my opinion, definitely the article of the week in todays WSJ Opinion page, via interview with Anna Schwartz: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122428279231046053.html

Schwartz co-wrote (with Milton Friedman) the seminal treatise on the role of the Fed in the Great Depression, A Monetary History of the United States, and at 92 is still an active researcher at the National Bureau of Economic Research. In the interview, she discusses the current economic crisis, its root causes, and en route to those topics alludes to a "tragic flaw" of leadership. I'll summarize and comment on those here.

The Current Economic Crisis and the Root Cause
Today's problems are based on a fundamental loss of trust -- "...a lack of faith in the ability of borrowers to repay their debts". The liquidity problems that have existed are essentially a symptom of that distrust, as banks cast doubt on their fellow banks ability to effectively value their balance sheets. Whether it is due to complexity, accounting, or simply negligence --- banks don't want to lend to each other because they are not comfortable that they will be repaid. This is a critical point that Schwartz very effectively articulates.

In Schwartz' words "...firms that made wrong decisions should fail... You shouldn't rescue them. And once that's established as a principle, I think the market recognizes that it makes sense. Everything works better when wrong decisions are punished and good decisions make you rich."

The Arbitrary Fed
Schwartz continues:

I think if you have some principles and know what you're doing, the market responds. They see that you have some structure to your actions, that it isn't just ad hoc... And the market respects people in supervisory positions who seem to be on top of what's going on. So I think if you're tough about firms that have invested unwisely, the market won't blame you. They'll say, 'Well, yeah, it's your fault. You did this. Nobody else told you to do it. Why should we be saving you at this point if you're stuck with assets you can't sell and liabilities you can't pay off?'

So what's the point? The point is that the Fed made a decision to bail out AIG, yet they let Lehman fail. Not only did they decide against letting the market work, they did so in an inconsistent manner, a situation that makes investors very nervous. Why? Because essentially, inconsistency leads to yet more risk - risk that can't be priced, just like the complex financial instruments that are also tied to this crisis.

Leadership Implications
Based on this discussion, some leadership takeaways...

First, leaders need to know what they are doing or be able to find those that do -- and manage them. My faith in Paulson is strong on this point, but who really knows.

Second, act in a principled, consistent manner. Whether you are a company participating in the market, or the government, or a business leader -- make sure that everyone "knows where you stand". Does everyone understand the principles that you believe in? Oh, and by the way, manage and perform to those...

So, essentially, in specific roles it's important to broadly communicate principle, philosophy, and intent, and then follow through (aka setting and managing expectations).

Here's to hoping that the Fed ultimately finds the way. It may be hard to blame them for "pulling out all the stops" to get the US through this crisis, but here's to hoping that they 1) identify a rational, consistent direction 2) that they communicate it clearly and 3) that they stick to it. Our financial futures may indeed depend upon it.

Leadership & The Military

I'm way behind on postings, so this is a little belated.

In this recent article in the WSJ, a little insight on leadership in the military by way of a review of the book by Peter Masoor "Baghdad at Sunrise": http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122360872142722167.html

Point of reference -- Peter Mansoor, is former Col. Peter Mansoor, commander of the U.S. 1st Brigade Combat Team, and in this book he outlines his experiences in Iraq during key periods before, and during, the Surge. Importantly (for me anyway), is his assessment on the role of leadership in the military; he defines the necessary brand of leadership in a very specific way. As the article and his book discuss "counterinsurgency requires above all else good leadership". To quote reviewer Moyar:

Like Gen. Petraeus and many other veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, Col. Mansoor believes that the Army must alter its personnel policies to promote leaders with the attributes and knowledge required by counterinsurgency. Instead of rewarding technical and tactical competence, he asserts, the personnel system should reward "those who can think creatively, lead change, and understand information warfare and the asymmetric battlefield -- those who are flexible and adaptive." As for indigenous leadership, he believes that the U.S. can help the Afghans as it helped the Iraqis, by influencing command selection, mentoring leaders and partnering directly with local elites.

(The bolding is my own). So, does war not represent the penultimate application of leadership in crisis? And doesn't true leadership in business require flexibility and adaptability above all else? Is that something our leadership communities teach today?

My relatively uninformed answer would be no, but to hear the identification of these characteristics clearly stated, and from a formidable and recognized leader in his own right, is refreshing. Building the right "reflexes" as a leader is an intangible that few development programs have been able to truly accomplish. Is this the traditional "nature vs. nurture" argument, or is there a way to engender this flexibility through situational curricula?

Today's WSJ Interview w/Intel CEO Paul Otellini

Some great insights from today's WSJ "weekend interview" with Intel's CEO. The article discusses Paul's experiences as he rose to the CEO role, and discusses some of his key learnings from former Intel CEOs - Gordon Moore (of Moore's Law) and Andy Grove among them.

Link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122246860358480579.html

A couple of insightful nuggets worth referencing:

From Andy Grove - "Ask why, and ask it again five more times, until all of the artifice is stripped away and you end up with the intellectually honest answer."

From Otellini - "A CEO's main job, because you have access to all the information, is to see the need to change before anyone else does."

It's always interesting to me that such an opportunity continues to exist today to implement true "fact-based decision-making". Grove's quote is really a manifestation of that, and of the need to truly investigate to identify root causes and get all the facts. Said like a true engineer..

Via Grove - a leader needs to truly dig to uncover all the salient facts, and via Otellini, a leader needs to be able to divine the future based on those available facts. And a last point, as illustrated by Craig Barrett (a third former Intel CEO) - leadership ultimately dictates decisiveness, and the courage of conviction.

Leadership in Transition

On Friday, the University of Chicago's Graduate School of Business conducted their annual Management Conference, and I had the opportunity to hear Dr. Harry Davis speak. His session, titled "Leadership in Transition", discussed the qualities necessary for those undertaking transitions --- be they organizational, career, and/or personal. Here are the key insights.

The three biggest "hurdles" to conducting a successful transition are:

• Rigid Identity - becoming too closely identified with a particular role, expertise, or specialty in a way that inhibits one's ability to evolve beyond it
• Contextual Blindness - the inability to adjust one's management philosophy based upon the transitional culture and/or environment
• Impatience - not being willing to 1) wait for the team or organization to recognize the situation and/or changes necessary or 2) take the time to build the necessary consensus to execute

His recommendations:

1. Take the time to consider and evaluate multiple viewpoints
2. Be suspicious of goal-directed agendas
3. Practice listening skills
4. Reconnect with core values and behaviors that really matter to you
5. Let go of previous identities

So you want to be a CMO...

Ever wonder what broad credentials separate senior marketers from their C-level contemporaries? As part of a conversation this week, I was guided to some white papers by Bradford McClain of Russell Reynolds, which provide some really good insight - http://www.russellreynolds.com/pdf/thought/RR0042%20Succussful_CMO_WhitePaper_8.pdf.

He references the following broad competencies:

• Strong business and financial acumen and ability to link marketing directly to corporate strategy
• Successful brand management and equity building
• Ability to develop strategy from analysis of insights
• Success driving results and delivering ROI
• Comprehensive program development skill across all relevant channels
• Ability to forge strategic alliances
• New product development skills
• Marketing and communications skills

Aside from some great content that can form the basis for a critical look at one's skills, Brad really captures the essence of the role in some other great ways. "The CMO must represent the voice of end users and be their advocate, inserting and often forcing their perspective on every relevant business issue the company faces."

The white paper also discusses critical success factors and organizational needs for the role, while acknowledging the turnover that occurs along with reasons. It is refreshing to run across someone who can articulate the role so effectively, and is also involved in identifying this talent for organizations.

If the CMO role is a career goal, these white papers are a worthwhile read. Special thanks to Jeff McCay for steering me this way!

Cisco: John Chambers

I'm going to start a leadership thread on this blog as well, based on recent thoughts presented on this topic via WSJ... Today's executive profile was with John Chambers of Cisco: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118644715420689890.html.

Some quick tips from John on running a technology company, which I feel are applicable to most organizations today:
1) Focus on market transitions and try to catch them at the right time.
2) Enter new markets with a sustainable differentiation.
3) Listen and take direction from your customers.
4) Develop a strong leadership team.
5) Innovate, innovate, innovate.

In addition to these direct tips, John also alludes to some methods that Cisco uses that I feel have also been critical to their on-going success, namely:

On strategy - set direction and remain committed to long-term strategic decisions : "...if you watch the major movements we made, while at times it may have taken us a little longer than we wanted, we always accomplished them."

On focus - insure that your differentiation you select fits with corporate strategy

Throughout John's tenure, there has been a clear commitment to development and implementation of a long-term corporate strategy, and although the company has faltered at times relative to the Street's short-term financial view, the longer-term strategy that Cisco adopts has always ultimately been validated. That ability to define a specific direction, and then identify and commit to critical long-term decisions, have made Cisco a real winner.