Showing posts with label leadership. Show all posts
Showing posts with label leadership. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 20, 2009

uberblog: Obama presidential inauguration 20 Jan 2009

uberblog: Obama presidential inauguration 20 Jan 2009

“President Obama's speech was outstanding, uplifting and inspirational”



... My fellow citizens: I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors. I thank President Bush for his service to our nation, as well as the generosity and co-operation he has shown throughout this transition.Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath ...

The words have been spoken during rising tides of prosperity and the still waters of peace. Yet, every so often the oath is taken amidst gathering clouds and raging storms. At these moments, America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because We the People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forbearers, and true to our founding documents. So it has been. So it must be with this generation of Americans.


That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood. Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age. Homes have been lost; jobs shed; businesses shuttered. Our health care is too costly; our schools fail too many; and each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet.


These are the indicators of crisis, subject to data and statistics. Less measurable but no less profound is a sapping of confidence across our land - a nagging fear that America’s decline is inevitable, and that the next generation must lower its sights.


Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real. They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this, America - they will be met.


On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord. On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.


We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things. The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.


In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of short-cuts or settling for less. It has not been the path for the faint-hearted - for those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things - some celebrated but more often men and women obscure in their labour, who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom.


For us, they packed up their few worldly possessions and travelled across oceans in search of a new life. For us, they toiled in sweatshops and settled the West; endured the lash of the whip and ploughed the hard earth. For us, they fought and died, in places like Concord and Gettysburg; Normandy and Khe Sahn.


Time and again these men and women struggled and sacrificed and worked till their hands were raw so that we might live a better life. They saw America as bigger than the sum of our individual ambitions; greater than all the differences of birth or wealth or faction. This is the journey we continue today. We remain the most prosperous, powerful nation on Earth. Our workers are no less productive than when this crisis began.


Our minds are no less inventive, our goods and services no less needed than they were last week or last month or last year. Our capacity remains undiminished. But our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions - that time has surely passed. Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.


For everywhere we look, there is work to be done. The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act - not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do.


Now, there are some who question the scale of our ambitions - who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short. For they have forgotten what this country has already done; what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage.


What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them - that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works - whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public’s dollars will be held to account - to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day - because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.


Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control - and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favours only the prosperous. The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our Gross Domestic Product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on our ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart - not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good.


As for our common defence, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience’s sake.


And so to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and that we are ready to lead once more.


Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.


We are the keepers of this legacy. Guided by these principles once more, we can meet those new threats that demand even greater effort - even greater cooperation and understanding between nations. We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people, and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan.


With old friends and former foes, we will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the spectre of a warming planet. We will not apologise for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.


For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.


To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society’s ills on the West - know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.


To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to suffering outside our borders; nor can we consume the world’s resources without regard to effect. For the world has changed, and we must change with it.


As we consider the road that unfolds before us, we remember with humble gratitude those brave Americans who, at this very hour, patrol far-off deserts and distant mountains. They have something to tell us today, just as the fallen heroes who lie in Arlington whisper through the ages. We honor them not only because they are guardians of our liberty, but because they embody the spirit of service; a willingness to find meaning in something greater than themselves. And yet, at this moment - a moment that will define a generation - it is precisely this spirit that must inhabit us all.


For as much as government can do and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the American people upon which this nation relies. It is the kindness to take in a stranger when the levees break, the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job which sees us through our darkest hours. It is the fire-fighter’s courage to storm a stairway filled with smoke, but also a parent’s willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides our fate.


Our challenges may be new. The instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends - hard work and honesty, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism - these things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history. What is demanded then is a return to these truths. What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility - a recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves, our nation, and the world, duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character, than giving our all to a difficult task.


... This is the price and the promise of citizenship.

... This is the source of our confidence - the knowledge that God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny.

... This is the meaning of our liberty and our creed - why men and women and children of every race and every faith can join in celebration across this magnificent mall, and why a man whose father less than sixty years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath.

So let us mark this day with remembrance, of who we are and how far we have travelled. In the year of America’s birth, in the coldest of months, a small band of patriots huddled by dying campfires on the shores of an icy river. The capital was abandoned. The enemy was advancing. The snow was stained with blood.


At a moment when the outcome of our revolution was most in doubt, the father of our nation ordered these words be read to the people: “Let it be told to the future world...that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive...that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet [it].


America. In the face of our common dangers, in this winter of our hardship, let us remember these timeless words. With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come. Let it be said by our children’s children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God’s grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations.



Read More......

Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Changing Team Behaviours and Attitudes

“ If you want to change an individual's behaviour or attitudes to a more desirable end - at any time and in any cirumstance ...”



You need to provide answers to two key motivational questions:

What's in it for me? and Why should I care?


Alexander Hiam in Motivational Management outlines 15 different motivators "incentive profile" for employees to consider:

Affiliation, Self-expression, Achievement, Security, Career growth, Excitement, Status, Purpose, Competition, Recognition, Consideration, Autonomy, Responsibility, Personal needs


Most everone wants to work in an environment where there is trust, good communications, the opportunity for contribution, emotional support, clear goals and feedback, and espirit de corps. Not to mention 'reap the fruis of our efforts'

To modify your team's Behaviour and attitudes, as well as to further motivate them to higher levels of performance, you must understand and respond to each person's needs.

Read More......

Monday, June 02, 2008

Greg Fleming cracks the whip again

“Greg Fleming is in for a busy year, the 45 year-old Merrill Lynch president and chief operating officer is breathing fire on all cylinders, addressing bank's staff at a “town hall” meetings and “circle of champions” events”



Merrill Lynch stunned the markets last October when it revealed $5 billion in writedowns from risky bets on sub-prime mortgage assets. Ballooning to $29 billion (£14.8 billion) and resulting in 4,000 job cuts


The revelation cost Mr O 'Neal, then the chief executive, his job and the bank's executives, led by Mr Fleming, were forced to go cap in hand to a collection of sovereign wealth funds to raise emergency capital.

Fleming remains in buoyant spirits. Arriving in London last month to rally the troops and get them re-focused and back on track after the extreme turbulence of the past nine months.
In his “town hall” meeting ...

I said that we have come a long way and put a lot behind us.


He emphasised on getting back to the day-to-day blocking and tackling that everybody was thinking about last June or July before it all went in a different direction.

It's important for people to know that we feel like we are in a position to be on the offensive and build the business


The 16-year Merrill Lynch veteran argues that the violent adjustment of huge writedowns, followed so quickly by intensive capital-raising, have made him confident that recovery would be quicker this time than in previous crises.

The fact that you could write that much down and put the capital back in such a short period of time leads me to be more optimistic than some about the future.


At least he can be confident of his own role. The arrival of Mr Thain raised questions about the future of all senior executives at Merrill Lynch, including Mr Fleming.

The new chief executive has brought in a number of staff from outside the company but reaffirmed Mr Fleming's status when he unveiled his new line up recently. Now, to judge by the number of references to Mr Thain, it is clear that they work together well.

On several occasions Mr Fleming ensures that he uses Mr Thain's words when answering questions on sensitive issues, such as the speculation that Merrill will need to go back to Singapore, Kuwait and South Korea's sovereign wealth funds.

Mr Fleming is in no doubt about the value of the sovereign wealth funds' intervention - the funds injected cash more quietly than could have been achieved by a mainstream institution, for a longer investment term than hedge funds and with fewer demands than private equity.

Many of them [the sovereign funds] do detailed analysis before moving, but when they are ready to go, they are ready to go in the amounts required given the scale of the problems. So they have been a significant positive, which is why I believe there has been less political noise in the US than you would have expected.


Fleming is also upbeat about a recovery in the financial markets ... with a revival in mergers and acquisitions, albeit in at least six months.

What you need is well-capitalised institutions that are able to do the deals. As we work our way through this, we will have more and more of those and then it will pick up considerably, no later than the middle of next year. Regional US banks and small financial companies will go under the hammer, and the strong euro will fuel cross-border deals ...


On the likelihood of consolidation among Wall Street's big four banks.

There's only Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch left, so it becomes a conversation about culture, fit etc.


Mr Fleming is even unruffled about the accounting rules that forced global investment banks to cut heavily the value of their credit-related securities, even if the
underlying assets were unimpaired ...

Fleming claims Merrill Lynch is well-positioned to participate in the markets' recovery ...

Bank owns 49 per cent of Blackrock, the blue-chip asset manager, and client businesses such as M&A advisory and equity underwriting are high return-on-equity operations.

The mortgage origination business is gone, but Merrill Lynch continues to offer mortgage servicing to other loan providers.

The 94-year-old American bank further increases its reliance on markets outside the United States ...

Sixty per cent of its institutional revenues now come from outside the US and that's going to be 75 per cent within the next five to seven years. Mr Fleming goes on to say. In wealth management we want to triple our revenues outside the US over the next five years.


Merrill Lynch had a reputation for cutting and burning staff more viciously than most rivals in the bad times. In the aftermath of September 11, the bank shed more than 20,000 workers, then struggled to find the manpower to capitalise on the subsequent upturn.

Mr Fleming admits ...

There is a concern in our employee base, a feeling of 'here we are again', and John Thain and I are very focused on not having that happen this time.


He figures that the worst writedowns are over and that the price of leveraged finance paper is picking up. It is not going at close to face-value prices, but he says that buyers have come out that were not there in the first quarter of this year.

Source: Times Online

Read More......

Friday, May 30, 2008

FSA New Leadership, renewed Culture

“Lord Adair Turner needs his firefighting skills”



"The Financial Services Authority is the worst financial regulator in the world." ... But it is not so bad that it can’t be made worse by Adair Turner ... growled one of the City’s leading figures following confirmation that Lord Turner would be the FSA’s new chairman.

The statement may be on the extreme wing of City opinion. But it underlines the scale of the task Lord Turner is taking on. The supervisory failures over Northern Rock have blown the FSA’s reputation out of the water and led to a crisis of confidence in the organisation.

Morale is low and the FSA is said to be finding it increasingly difficult to recruit good people.



While the FSA still has many admirers on Wall Street, London's lead over other financial centres feels like it is narrowing. The fight against financial wrongdoing – as measured by fines and scalps – seems stalled. And perhaps the biggest prize of all, getting a fairer deal for ordinary consumers, seems as elusive as ever.

FSA officials seem to spend a great deal of time studying the fine print in financial advertisements. But they missed the biggest potential disaster since the the authority’s formation – Northern Rock’s business model – which was staring them in the face.

Increasingly now, the FSA has no one to blame but itself. It already has sweeping powers and when it asks for additional weapons, it gets them, in recent months winning additional powers in banking supervision and dramatic new powers to offer witnesses immunity from prosecution. It also has plenty of resources in the form of a 2,000-strong army of well rewarded and well qualified staff. What it lacks, is a can-do culture.

This is a bureaucracy that still measures effectiveness in terms of numbers of lever-arch files filled and length of meetings attended. It is an organisation with a bottomless capacity to create consultative documents but less appetite to root out bad behaviour and punish it. Its instinctive reaction is to create more rules for everyone, including the innocent majority, rather than to go out and challenge the guilty minority. Its senior people rejoice in issuing myriad warnings and sermons, but then tend to see their work as done.


Lord Turner’s experience of business and bureaucracy make him an attractive candidate for the job. (Quite why he wants it is less clear). He has one foot in Whitehall and one in the Square Mile, but is not seen as too much of a City insider – in spite of his service over the years at Merrill Lynch, Standard Chartered and Paternoster. And as a fully paid-up member of the great and good on government working parties should help him to avoid the more obvious elephant traps of public life.

In the City he may be regarded with a little suspicion. His relations with new Labour when running the CBI in the mid 1990s were seen as a little bit too cosy at times. His pro-business credentials cannot be doubted, but some in the City see him as too cerebral and technocratic with little feel for the shopfloor of financial services.

It is providing leadership that may be Lord Turner’s biggest challenge. As part-time chairman, he cannot do much about the minutiae of the regulatory work.

But culture works down from the top. The FSA needs someone with the capacity to inspire the troops into enforcing better behaviour and preventing new disasters without piling up costs and stifling innovation. If Lord Turner can achieve that, he will earn his peerage all over again.

Source: Times 30 May 2008

Read More......

Sunday, January 13, 2008

Women still face Glass Ceiling

“Barclays Bank appoints 5 women among 80 managing directors”



Barclays Capital, the investment banking division of Barclays, has been forced to defend its record as an equal opportunities employer after it emerged that it had promoted 80 managing directors, of which only five are women. BarCap, employs about 15,700 staff across offices in 26 countries, took out a full-page advertisement in the Financial Times 10 Jan, to announce the promotions, covering public relations executives as well as bankers in locations from London and New York to Madrid and Singapore.

The investment banking unit, led by Bob Diamond, specialises in the corporate credit markets and has been one of the fastest-growing City employers. It accounts for more than a third of Barclays’ annual profits, which last year topped £7 billion, and employs a little under half the group’s 33,000 staff.

Two of the new female BarCap MDs are in London. The other three are based in New York, Jakarta and Singapore.

Employment commentators said that the promotions underscored the perception of the City remaining a male-dominated environment. Nevertheless, they were loath to judge BarCap, pointing out that the decision about whether to pursue a banking career is also a lifestyle choice, tending to involve long hours and a gruelling travel schedule, albeit for considerable financial rewards. It emerged yesterday that, after meeting performance targets, Mr Diamond was on course to collect a £14.8 million payout covering the past three years. The payout means that Mr Diamond is likely to have received about £75 million in pay, cash bonuses and share awards since he joined the board in 2005.

Heather McGregor, a director of Taylor Bennett, the recruitment consultant, said: “Investment banks do struggle to find women for senior positions because very often women have other agendas and choose not to make their careers a priority.”

Of the 358 executive directors at FTSE 100 firms, only 14 — less than 4 per cent — are female, according to Manifest, the proxy shareholder voting specialist.

A spokeswoman for The Equalities and Human Rights Commission said that it was disappointed but not surprised by the lack of female appointees at BarCap: “It’s not a simple question of discrimination — it’s also about working practices.”

Siobhan Loftus, a media relations executive at Barclays Capital and one of the new managing directors, defended the promotions, which she said were based entirely on merit. “We are a meritocracy. In our diversity policy we would hope to promote irrespective of any gender bias,” she said.

“We would always look for the best person for the job. We want to provide an environment where people feel comfortable irrespective of their background, gender, sexuality or race.”

Food for Thought:

Economist "Women in Business" 2005 ...

It's 20 years since the term “glass ceiling” was coined by the Wall Street Journal to describe the apparent barriers that prevent women from reaching the top of the corporate hierarchy; and it is ten years since the American government's specially appointed Glass Ceiling Commission published its recommendations. In 1995 the commission said that the barrier was continuing “to deny untold numbers of qualified people the opportunity to compete for and hold executive level positions in the private sector.” It found that women had 45.7% of America's jobs and more than half of master's degrees being awarded. Yet 95% of senior managers were men, and female managers' earnings were on average a mere 68% of their male counterparts'.

Ten years on, women account for 46.5% of America's workforce and for less than 8% of its top managers, although at big Fortune 500 companies the figure is a bit higher. Female managers' earnings now average 72% of their male colleagues'. Booz Allen Hamilton, a consulting firm that monitors departing chief executives in America, found that 0.7% of them were women in 1998, and 0.7% of them were women in 2004. In between, the figure fluctuated. But the firm says that one thing is clear: the number is “very low and not getting higher”.

Source: Times Online

In August 2006 Forbes reported that 70% of women and 57% of men believe an invisible barrier -- a glass ceiling -- prevents women from getting ahead in business, according to a study of 1,200 executives in eight countries, including the U.S., Australia, Austria and the Philippines were the findings of a study conducted by
Accenture.

Women aren't as worried about the pay gap as they were five years ago, says Carol Gallagher, president of the Executive Women's Alliance and author of Going To The Top: A Road Map for Success from America's Leading Women Executives. Gallagher, who is also an executive coach, says Gen Xers and Yers don't think any barriers prevent them from getting to the top.

And baby boomers are now looking toward retirement, not obsessing about pay. When Gallagher published her book in 2000, there was a huge demand for information about the gender gap. At the time, almost all her executive coaching clients were women seeking the secrets of corporate success. Now 70% of her clients are men. "There [isn't] a need for as much of the women's group stuff," Gallagher says.

To some extent, there's a disconnect between American women and their counterparts abroad. In a study of American executives by Catalyst, a research and advocacy firm, women were just as likely as men to say they aspired to senior management positions. "Women want the responsibilities and rewards that come with top positions," says Sheila Wellington, a professor at New York University's Stern School of Business, who was president of Catalyst when the survey was conducted.

But a global study, also conducted by Catalyst, found that men worldwide desire the top jobs more often than women.

Even in the U.S., some experts say the glass ceiling doesn't affect job satisfaction. Women make sacrifices at work in exchange for greater happiness in their lives as a whole, says Warren Farrell, author of Why Men Earn More.

His book offers 25 reasons for the pay gap: Women work fewer hours, for example, and they don't stay at jobs as long as men do. Whether it's nature or socialization driving their decisions, women tend to choose lives that allow them to spend more time with their families, Farrell contends.

Even ambitious women don't measure success in high salaries and fancy job titles. Relationships with colleagues and giving back to the community are more important to women than salary, according to "The Hidden Brain Drain: Off-Ramps and On-Ramps in Women's Careers," a study by the Center for Work-Life Policy, which was published in the Harvard Business Review last year.

"They want to feel satisfied and good about their work, but also want to feel satisfied about other things in their life," says Melinda Wolfe, head of global leadership and diversity at Goldman Sachs Group (nyse: GS - news - people ).

Even if most women don't want to break the glass ceiling, Wolfe says, the few that do shouldn't be ignored. Sometimes their ambitions have been tempered by a corporate culture that stifles their success. Sometimes they choose circuitous career paths, taking some time to care for children, prepare for a career change or work in the nonprofit sector.

There's another reason why the pay gap has barely budged in the last five years: Women don't ask for more money. "They don't think they deserve it," says Lois Frankel, president of Corporate Coaching International and author of Nice Girls Don't Get the Corner Office. She adds, "We don't have the [negotiating] skills. We see it as something smarmy."

But Susan Solovic, CEO of SBTV, a Web site that creates video programming aimed at small-business owners, offers another reason why women aren't complaining about the pay gap: They've decided to work for themselves. The number of women-owned firms grew 17% between 1997 and 2004, according to the Center for Women's Business Research, while the total number of firms rose only 9%. Says Solovic: "There is really no glass ceiling when it comes to owning your own business."

Source: Forbes

Read More......

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

Bear Stearns loses boss

Type your summary here

“Bear Stearns CEO steps down following Q4 loss of $854 million”


Jimmy Cayne, is set to walk from the bank, after a miserable year with substantial losses the first in its history and the company's stock dropped 57 percent in New York trading during the past year, more than any Wall Street rival. The 73-year-old will hand over the reins to Alan Schwartz, who is currently Bear Stearns' president. Mr Cayne told the bank's board that he hopes he can stay on as non-executive chairman and Bear Stearns directors are set to discuss this option.
Bear Stearns announced fourth-quarter losses of $850 million last month after the bank was forced to write down $1.9 billion on mortgage-related assets.

At the time, Mr Cayne took responsibility by waiving his annual bonus, but experts expect more losses to be made. Shares in Bear Stearns dropped 14 per cent in value over the past week and halved their worth over the past year.

Mr Cayne has been involved in the bank for 14 years and replaced Warren Spector as chief executive. Other top bosses to leave their posts in the wake of the credit crisis include Peter Wuffli at UBS, Chuck Prince at Citigroup, Merrill Lynch & Co., Stan O'Neal.

Read More......

Thursday, December 27, 2007

Common dilemma company grows, leadership roles change

“Symptoms of a personal/professional misalignment may include”


* Frustration.
* Lack of energy.
* Not enjoying going to work.
* Feeling as though you're leading two lives.
* Not feeling lucky.

When a CXO's individual goals are out of whack with corporate objectives, it undermines your passion, which is an important source of persistence and creativity.
What's more, a lack of passion on your part affects the synergy and energy of your staff. When employees see that their leaders aren't committed, they back off on performance.

Goal alignment revolves around:

  • Mission. Why are you doing what you're doing?

  • Vision. Where are you headed? What specific milestones are you aiming for? (This is especially important for partners to agree on.)

  • Values. What's most important to you? What makes you feel satisfied and happy?


If you're not touching the parts of the business that you love, it can be a big problem and cause a disconnect


Balancing Act
Aligning personal and corporate goals fuels growth, leadership and creativity.

Guideposts for growth
Goal alignment benefits CEOs in a variety of ways.
  • If you're clear on goals and values, you're not going to be sidetracked
  • If employees embrace your corporate goals and values, they'll be proud to be there every day, they'll respect the work that they're doing — and they'll respect each other.


That creates synergy for the organization; the whole group can move together and push to new levels.


Guiding Behaviour
Values are the meat — they're where your goals come from

Reconnecting
Introspection is an important part of goal alignment. Take the time to examine your level of commitment.

Read More......

Monday, December 17, 2007

Hard Skills CEO vs Soft Skills CEO

“When the going gets tough...”


A study published by the University of Chicago GSB suggests that tougher is better when it comes to making it as a CEO. A survey of more than 300 US private equity firm CEOs shows that speedy, aggressive, persistent CEO candidates are more likely to be hired than their good-at-listening, open-to-criticism, team-playing counterparts.This is bad, says the Chartered Management Institute. Its Quality of Working Life report, which surveyed 1,511 managers, found the most common British management styles are bureaucratic (40 per cent), reactive (37 per cent) and authoritarian (30 per cent). This tendency towards "overbearing and controlling" team leaders, says the CMI, is stifling British workplaces, resulting in higher levels of absence and lower levels of productivity.

Weighing up ... Hard Skills CEO . Soft Skills CEO - what's your thoughts !

Steven Kaplan new study suggests that hard-nosed personal virtues such as persistence and efficiency count for more than "softer" strengths like teamwork or flexibility.

"We found that 'hard' skills, which are all about getting things done, were paramount," says lead author Steven Kaplan, a professor of finance and entrepreneurship. "Soft skills centering on teamwork weren't as pivotal. That was a bit of a surprise to us."


Five CEO traits that correlate most closely with business success at buyout companies -- and five that score lowest, according to University of Chicago researchers.

Traits that matter...
• Persistence
• Attention to detail
• Efficiency
• Analytical skills
• Setting high standards

...and not so much
• Strong oral communication
• Teamwork
• Flexibility/adaptability
• Enthusiasm
• Listening skills

Mark Gallogly, a co-founder of Centerbridge Partners, a New York private-equity firm, says the academics' findings match many of his beliefs about what's important in a CEO. He puts a premium on bosses who can hire well, excel at efficiency and execution, and can be aggressive but respectful. By contrast, public-company CEOs may need more soft skills to manage relations with wide shareholder bases and other diverse constituencies.

Both Prof. Kaplan and ghSmart executives caution against dismissing the low-scoring traits entirely. On enthusiasm, for example, the study found that ultra-enthusiastic managers didn't fare meaningfully better than ones who were just moderately enthusiastic. But some level of enthusiasm is bound to be of value, says Randall Street, a ghSmart principal -- and most finalists in a CEO search will exhibit enthusiasm. The same would apply to other soft traits, such as listening skills or treating people with respect.

Source: Times Online, ghSmartInc. WSJ

Read More......

Monday, December 10, 2007

Always Deliver Honest Feedback

“For a leader, the 'soft' option is never an option”



... ignoring a problem and hoping it will go away will just makes things worse. Direct, candid feedback is essential; people deserve such honesty and are likely to thrive as a result.

How best to manage your people

1. Being candid and giving people honest feedback is always the right thing to do, as through this you are being loyal to both the individual concerned and to the company.

2. When delivering honest feedback it is important to be supportive and constructively critical.

3. When you’re having a conversation with an individual who is experiencing difficulties your message must be clear, because at the end of the day no one should be under any misunderstanding as to what was said, what is required from both sides, and what will happen if either side does not deliver on its objectives.

4. Don't ever think that a problem will just go away on its own: it won't. Leaving the issue to stagnate will just make it worse and much harder to deal with.

Ideas for Action

Prepare thoroughly for any performance review; this includes a checklist for everything you’ll want to discuss beforehand.

Remind the individual of the company values, which they were probably given upon joining the company. Give them another set to take away with them, and explain how their behavior is out of kilter with this and the performance of the rest of the team. Also explain how their actions are affecting the rest of the team’s performance.

In order to ensure that there is no misunderstanding about what was discussed, have the meeting’s notes typed up and confidentially circulated to all present. This gives a clear benchmark of your expectancy of the individual’s behavior going forward.

Put time aside in your own diary every few months to evaluate your team's individual performances. By keeping a regular eye on their activities and conduct you may be able to spot potential problems before they have time to manifest themselves.

Questions You Need to Ask Yourself

Is there someone you should be having a frank conversation with, but are procrastinating in doing so?

How do you strike the right balance between being constructive and being critical in this kind of situation?

Can you think of an instance in which you left it too long to give one of your direct reports some honest feedback? What did you learn from the experience?

Read More......

Friday, December 07, 2007

Women and the Labyrinth of Leadership

“When you put all the pieces together, a new picture emerges for why women don’t make it into the C-suite. It’s not the glass ceiling, but the sum of many obstacles along the way.”


Alice H. Eagly & Linda L. Carli in their book "Through the Labyrinth" identified that Women occupy 40% of all managerial positions in the United States. Where only 6% of the Fortune 500's top executives are female, and just 2% of those firms have women CEOs. "We've long blamed such numbers on the "glass ceiling," notion that women successfully climb the corporate hierarchy until they're blocked just below the summit. But the problem stems from discrimination operating at all ranks, not just the top,"

To move more women into the corporate executive suite, one must attack all barriers to advancement simultaneously. Such as: "Prepare women for line management with demanding assignments. Use objective criteria to measure performance. And give working mothers additional time to prove themselves worthy of promotion."

They explain the need for Metaphors since they matter because they are part of the storytelling that can compel change ... Eagly & Carli goes on to redefine a better metaphor for what confronts women in their professional endeavors naming it "The Labyrinth". Because of its image with a long and varied history in ancient Greece, India, Nepal, native North and South America, medieval Europe, and elsewhere. As a contemporary symbol, it conveys the idea of a complex journey toward a goal worth striving for.

Passage through a labyrinth is not simple or direct, but requires persistence, awareness of one’s progress, and a careful analysis of the puzzles that lie ahead. It is this meaning that they convey in "Through the Labyrinth".

Women who aspire to top leadership, routes exist but are full of twists and turns, both unexpected and expected. Because all labyrinths have a viable route to the center, it is understood that goals are attainable. The metaphor acknowledges obstacles but is not ultimately discouraging.

Times have changed, however, and the glass ceiling metaphor is now more wrong than right. For one thing, it describes an absolute barrier at a specific high level in organizations. The fact that there have been female chief executives, university presidents, state governors, and presidents of nations gives the lie to that charge. At the same time, the metaphor implies that women and men have equal access to entry- and midlevel positions. They do not.

The image of a transparent obstruction also suggests that women are being misled about their opportunities, because the impediment is not easy for them to see from a distance. But some impediments are not subtle. Worst of all, by depicting a single, unvarying obstacle, the glass ceiling fails to incorporate the complexity and variety of challenges that women can face in their leadership journeys. In truth, women are not turned away only as they reach the penultimate stage of a distinguished career. They disappear in various numbers at many points leading up to that stage.

Eagly & Carli explains that tackling the obstacles to women's progress, will increase a firm's competitive prowess. "If we can understand the various barriers that make up this labyrinth, and how some women find their way around them, we can work more effectively to improve the situation, and understand the obstructions that women run up against?"

They recommend these strategies for increasing the number of women in top positions:

Understand the Career Barriers Women Encounter
Extensive academic and government research studies identify these obstacles:

* Prejudice: Men are promoted more quickly than women with equivalent qualifications, even in traditionally female settings such as nursing and education.

* Resistance to women's leadership: People view successful female managers as more deceitful, pushy, selfish, and abrasive than successful male managers.

* Leadership style issues: Many female leaders struggle to reconcile qualities people prefer in women (compassion for others) with qualities people think leaders need to succeed (assertion and control).

* Family demands: Women are still the ones who interrupt their careers to handle work/family trade-offs. Overloaded, they lack time to engage in the social networking essential to advancement.

Intervene on Multiple Fronts

Because of the interconnectedness of obstacles women face, companies that want more women leaders need to apply a variety of tactics simultaneously:

* Evaluate and reward women's productivity by objective results, not by "number of hours at work."

* Make performance-evaluation criteria explicit, and design evaluation processes to limit the influence of evaluators' biases.

* Instead of relying on informal social networks and referrals to fill positions, use open-recruitment tools such as advertising and employment agencies.

* Avoid having a sole female member on any team. Outnumbered, women tend to be ignored by men.

* Encourage well-placed, widely esteemed individuals to mentor women.

* Ensure a critical mass of women in executive positions to head off problems that come with tokenism. Women's identities as women will become less salient to colleagues than their individual competencies.

* Give women demanding developmental job experiences to train them for leadership positions.

* Establish family-friendly HR practices (including flextime, job sharing, and telecommuting). You'll help women stay in their jobs while rearing children, allow them to build social capital, and enable them eventually to compete for higher positions. Encourage men to participate in family-friendly benefits, too (for example, by providing paternity leave). When only women participate, their careers suffer because companies expect them to be off the job while exercising those options.

* Give employees with significant parental responsibilities more time to show they're qualified for promotion. Parents may need a year or two more than childless professionals.

* Establish alumni programs for women who need to step away from the workforce. Then tap their expertise to show that returning is possible. Consulting giant Booz Allen, for example, sees its alumni as a source of subcontractors.

Purchase Full Harvard Business Review Article

Read More......

Thursday, December 06, 2007

Great ‘mindshare’ between client and bank,”

“Viswas Raghavan transforms JP Morgan European division equity-linked prowess into a broader platform ...”


I stumbled across this article the other day. An interview with JPMorgan’s Viswas Raghavan Head of Equity International Capital Markets. When I knew Viswas back in the early years 1993-6 at Lehman Brothers where we both worked in Investment Banking ... a mathematical genius, a very intelligent person who continues to shape future leaders of the investment banking world.


At the end of the 1990s, the state of JPMorgan’s European equity capital markets (ECM) business looked in jeopardy. Drained by a sometimes painful merger with Chase Manhattan and the inevitable staff exits, its presence in the market was negligible.

It is a very different picture now. In 2006, JPMorgan’s share of the Europe, Middle East and Africa equity issuance market jumped by 30%, and in the league tables it rose from sixth to joint first in terms of the number of eligible deals completed, and to second by dollar volume. In the year to date, it is first for global equity and equity-linked business, and second in Europe.

The foundations of JPMorgan’s resurgence in ECM have been built on the strength of JPMorgan’s equity-linked platform. Over the past several years it has become an enviable franchise, to the point where JPMorgan’s equity profit and loss was more or less accounted for by equity-linked transactions.

Viswas Raghavan, who joined JPMorgan as head of equity-linked operations in 2000 from Lehman Brothers and who is now head of international equity capital markets, has played an instrumental role in the division’s revival and the translation of equity-linked strength into broader ECM business.

Being ‘branded’ as an equity-linked house was not a slight, Mr Raghavan says, but an ideal platform on which to build an initial public offering (IPO) business. “We did the complicated bit first and then built out the vanilla business; if you can place a convertible’s delta in the market, then you can distribute straight equity. It is not a surprise for us to be where we are.”

Standing out from the crowd

Building the business in that way enabled JPMorgan to differentiate itself from competitors and prove its creative credentials, says Mr Raghavan. “Because we placed the delta we knew the investors and could deliver them to the client. Doing equity-linked deals gives you the opportunity to be smarter and more innovative. That’s a great way to build your footprint.”

The translation of equity-linked expertise into conventional equity business has slowly gathered pace over the past five years or so, spanning deals such as that for Fortis in 2002 when JPMorgan invented the floating rate equity-linked subordinated hybrid (Fresh) product – the first convertible bond to qualify as bank capital – and the extraordinary deal for Allianz in January 2005, which combined an equity-linked exchangeable bond, a straight equity placement and a hybrid capital issue.

It was not rocket science, yet this deal managed to satisfy an entire year’s funding needs in a single €4bn swoop without damaging the insurer’s share price, and at the same time strengthened earlier structures.

“There was a great ‘mindshare’ between client and bank,” says Mr Raghavan. “Intellectually, we had fun, while making sure we achieved all the client’s objectives.”

Mr Raghavan believes that this kind of mindshare is a quality that defines JPMorgan’s ECM business, and is partly determined by the longevity of the bank’s ECM team. This includes key members such as Klaus Hessberger and Ina De, co-heads of EMEA ECM origination; Monika Weiler, responsible for the equity-linked business; Sylvie Sauton*, head of ECM for France/Belgium; and Donal Quigley, head of ECM execution.

“It is the same team that has taken the bank from 18th in the league tables to the top tier, and we have worked zealously to get here. That level of achievement over so many years creates continuity and a close relationship with clients,” he says.

In 2006 – the first year that Mr Raghavan believes showed all the fruits of the team’s hard work – the firm demonstrated an impressively (and in the current climate, reassuringly) diverse business in terms of product, industry and geography. The bank’s equity-linked business continues to impress – with transactions such as the $5.8bn mandatory convertible for US-based mining firm Freeport-McMoRan – but it is participation in a growing list of trophy IPO deals that shows how JPMorgan’s ECM business has matured.

2007 Head of international equity capital markets.

2006 Head of EMEA and Asia-Pacific equity and debt capital markets.

2003 Sole head of EMEA equity capital markets.

2002 Promoted to joint head of EMEA capital markets.

2000 Joined JPMorgan as head of equity-linked capital markets for Europe & Asia-Pacific.

1998 Promoted to head of equity-linked capital markets for EMEA and Asia-Pacific at Lehman Brothers.

*Sylvie Sauton (Lehman Brothers) ... I remember you as well.

Full Article: The Banker (subscribers access)

Read More......

Tuesday, December 04, 2007

Staff retention problems? Look in the mirror

“One of the best ways to assess the quality of an organization is to look at those who are leaving it.”



John McKee at Techrepublic says one of the best ways to assess the quality of an organization is to look at those who are leaving it: "If a company can attract but not retain solid performers, it's likely the company will be spending far too much on the wrong things."

McKee goes on to say that many managers think it’s the other way around. They say the best way to tell is by looking at the people who are joining their team. “If good people are coming aboard, that’s proof that we are building strength, right?”

Wrong.

One of the best ways to assess the quality of an organization is to look at those who are leaving ... when the good ones from the senior management team jump ship you have to ask yourself some important questions ...

Attracting great talent has a lot to do with many things. These include the advertising done to get the attention of prospective employees, the place where the interview occurs, who is doing the interview (are they a good salesperson for the employer?) and the compensation package being offered. If an organization has a good brand reputation it’s even more likely to attract good people in the door.
But what really counts is the rate of employee churn. If a company can attract but not retain solid performers, I’ve found that it’s likely the company will be spending far too much on the wrong things. No company with high employee turnover is focused on doing the right things i.e.: satisfying their market.

Two new studies out of Canada have some interesting stats regarding why people leave their employers.

First and foremost: Blame the Boss.

The audits were conducted by Monster Canada. They covered over 5000 respondents. Because of the broad scope of Monster users, I think it’s likely to represent a fairly broad spectrum of levels and industries. And because of the similarities between countries, I’d expect it to be fairly consistent with findings done in the US.

The shorthand version of the results - 80% of the respondents blamed their boss for their decision to quit. Only 16% quit for reasons unrelated to the boss.

In greater detail, the reports said:

- 35% said they need expectations to be stated more clearly than is generally the case with their boss. (I believe that most people want to perform well be as effective as possible, but most supervisors don’t take the time to get to know their team members’ individual styles.)
- 32% claimed the boss didn’t treat people fairly. (My thought on this: others were treated unfairly well.)
- 28% reported that the boss ruled by intimidation. (My comment is don’t try this with Millennials or even GenX’ers and expect it to work more than a few times. Works for Boomers in most cases.)
- 27% said their boss should learn to admit when a mistake is made and not blame others.
- 22% noted that supervisors should become more accessible. (Common complaint across industries in my experience. Emails don’t replace face time.)
- 16% said the boss needs to listen to employees more.

I realize that no boss today has the time to do “everything right every time”. That said, it’s clear that the tables are turning because there are more jobs than job seekers in many communities currently. If you want - or expect - to retain the best talent in your shop; I suggest you take a good look in the mirror. Explanations and asking for understanding won’t keep good people.

Read More......

Friday, November 30, 2007

Mandy Mannix scoopes Women in City Award

“Mandy Mannix, managing director and global head of capital solutions, scooped the inaugural award for achievement from Women in the City”



As well as building the capital solutions business for Lehman Brothers in Europe on a global level, which involves sourcing new capital for hedge funds, Mannix has recently been appointed co-head of €-WILL, Lehman Brothers' women's network.

Mannix said she was pleased that the award would help her mentor other women, which she believes is crucial. She said: "It gives me an even greater platform to reach other talented females across the industry. I am very pleased to have the opportunity to extend my own professional knowledge through the educational aspect of this award. I believe that mentoring plays an essential role in both career development and professional growth."

Source: e-financials

Read More......

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

Leadership Principles

“You were given the job as the Leader to quickly make things happen and make things better”



Leaders take charge, make things happen, dream big dreams and then translate them into reality. Leaders attract the voluntary commitment from followers, energize them and transform organisations into new entities with greater potential for growth, excellence and market superiority.

Leaders are never content with things the way they are. To be leading, by definition, is t be in front, breaking new ground, conquering new worlds, moving away from the status quo. Great Leaders are never satisfied with current level of performance. They constantly strive for higher and higher levels of achievement. They move beyond the status quo themselves, and they as the same of those around them.

Before becoming a Leader, you must learn to be a great follower. The best Leaders are those who have served many apprenticeships.

Do what good Leaders do ...

- Accept Responsibility
- Accountable for Results
- Self disciplined
- 0Good Character
- Learn to grow and develop
- Communicator (learn the power of silence - Listen)
- People skills
- Build Momentum
- Take Action
- Set Performance Standards and Expertations
- Earn Trust, Loyality and Support
- Develop & Build Teams
- Delegate
- Have Courage, Risk Taker
- Make Decisions
- Attitude & Enthusiasm
- Humility & Empathy
- Stay cool with the heat is on
- Creates Vision
- Knows when to say NO

Read More......

Thursday, November 22, 2007

There's no substitute for experience

“Michael J. Saylor,Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Microstrategy (Business Intelligence) in 2001. ...”



"When Sanju Bansal and I started the company, we were 24, and we were like people who had taken up yachting for the joy of the sport. Then we got successively better and better, and finally we took a ship onto the open ocean on a major voyage. And the first voyage worked well, the second worked better, the third one worked great, and then -- with the entire world looking on -- we were caught in a "perfect storm." We came out the other end with our lives, but we lost part of our crew. And now I'm sailing again in 2001, but I don't look at the ship the same way anymore. I'm never going to look at the ship as a joy ride. I can't. But then again, maybe that's what qualifies me to run a company. Maybe that's what qualifies a captain to captain a ship."

MicroStrategy was named as Forbes 200 Best Small Companies: Pure-Play Business Intelligence Software Vendor Receives High Marks for Sales Growth, Profit Growth, and Return on Equity

Read More......

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Don't shoot the Messenger

“Sometimes its not the Message its the Messenger”



"Shooting the messenger" metaphoric phrase to describe the act of lashing out at the (blameless) the bearer of bad news ... "Don't shoot the messenger" was first expressed by Shakespeare in Henry IV, part 2 (1598) [citation needed] and in Antony and Cleopatra[1] (1606-07). An analogy of the phrase can come from the breaching of an invisible code of conduct in war, where a commanding officer was expected to receive and send back emissaries or diplomatic envoys sent by the enemy unharmed. During the early Warring States period of China, the concept of chivalry and virtue prevented the executions of messengers sent by opposing sides.

Bad news by definition is bad. So bear in mind "Clarity is the antedote to anxiety" ... use these 7 tips:-

1. Avoid putting the bad news between good news. The old good-bad-good combination only confuses people. Many victims of this approach walk away remembering the good news and forget the bad.

2. Just get it over with. If the person is about to get blasted, he won't benefit from a discussion about his weekend.

3. Use tact & be direct. If it isn't working out, say so.

4. Separate the person from the problem. Stay focused on behaviors, not personalities. The person may be a bad fit for that job and can be valuable to another organization. Your job is to judge performance, not people.

5. Do not rush it. Allow some time for discussion. The person may need to clarify what the bad news means.

6. Say it and be quiet. Leaders sometimes feel a need to go on and on. State your reasoning and be done. You give away your authority by justifying yourself too much.

7. Avoid telling people the whats and whys. Don't make bad news worse by telling people who don't need to know.

Read More......

Friday, November 16, 2007

The Top 50 Thinkers

“Business gurudom remains a man's world, with only three women in the top 50”


1. C. K. Prahalad Indian management guru
2. Bill Gates Geek-turned-philanthropist
3. Alan Greenspan Ex-Federal Reserve chairman
4. Michael Porter Competitive strategy author
5. Gary Hamel Business strategist
6. W. Chan Kim & Renée Mauborgne INSEAD professors - Blue Ocean Strategy
7. Tom Peters In Search of Excellence author
8. Jack Welch Former GE CEO-turned-columnist
9. Richard Branson Iconic British entrepreneur
10. Jim Collins Good to Great author

11. Philip Kotler Kellogg’s marketing guru
12. Robert Kaplan & David Norton The creators of the balanced scorecard
13. Kjell Nordstrom & Jonas Ridderstralle Funky Business duo from Sweden
14. Charles Handy The original portfolio worker
15. Stephen Covey The man with seven successful and highly effective habits
16. Henry Mintzberg Controverisal Canadian management expert
17. Thomas Stewart Editor of Harvard Business Review
18. Malcolm Gladwell Author of The Tipping Point and Blink
19. Lynda Gratton London Business School professor and author of Hot Spots
20. Donald Trump US Apprentice host

21. Scott Adams Creator of Dilbert
22. Ram Charan Co-author of Execution
23. Vijay Govindarajan A Tuck professor and GE’s new chief innovation consultant
24. Warren Bennis Veteran on leadership
25. Clayton Christensen Innovation expert
26. Thomas Friedman Author of The World is Flat
27. Kenichi Ohmae Globalisation guru
28. Rosabeth Moss Kanter Renowned Harvard academic and author
29. Steve Jobs Apple’s iconic business leader
30. John Kotter Leadership and change guru

31. Jeff Immelt Jack Welch’s successor at GE
32. Rob Goffee & Gareth Jones Authentic leaders at London Business School
33. Adrian Slywotsky Heavyweight modern strategist
34. Marshall Goldsmith Coach to the top executives
35. Bill George Another fan of authentic leadership
36. Larry Bossidy Co-author of Execution with Charan (22)
37. Daniel Goleman The father of social and emotional intelligence
38. Marcus Buckingham Top self-help guru
39. Howard Gardner Harvard’s creator of the multiple intelligence concept

40. Edward de Bono Supreme lateral thinker
41. Al Gore Climate change campaigner
42. David Ulrich Human resources expert
43. Seth Godin An insightful marketer
44. Costas Markides Charismatic strategist
45. Rakesh Khurana Harvard thinker
46. Richard D’Aveni Hyper-competition expert
47. Peter Senge Learning organisation guru
48. Chris Argyris The originator of the learning organisation concept
49. Jeffrey Pfeffer Stanford intellectual
50. Chris Zook Bain consultant-turned-author

Read More......

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Quality over Quantity

Former Citigroup chief Chuck Prince commented last week that the firm needed to

“install better leaders within top management rather than break up the various businesses”



Restructuring is an unsettling time for both the management team and its people. It often the case a new person steps into the shoes of his/her predecessor, the reporting lines and the business landscapes shifts from decentralised to centralised and vice-versa.
Todd Thomson ex Citigroup noted at the NY Reuters Finance Summit that “I fundamentally don’t believe the issues at Citi are ones of strategy. I fundamentally don’t believe the issues at Citi are ones of being in too many products and too many businesses. I fundamentally believe it’s an issue of execution.” He futher added: “If you look at every other significant bank out there today, they do exactly the same thing Citi does. There’s nothing that Citi does that JP Morgan doesn’t do, that Bank of America doesn’t do, that UBS doesn’t do, that HSBC doesn’t do. They all do the same things.”

Its true, its not how many product lines you have. It comes back to leadership and execution, having the right person at the top of the company who can look down and see what's happening on the ground level, listens to people, has a management team that works as a team.

Source: Financial News Online

Read More......

Friday, October 05, 2007

CIO as Chief Process Officer

Michael Hammer quotes "CIOs don't typically lead corporate transformation, but they're well positioned to help guide business process and improvement changes, says Michael Hammer, original champion of the business reengineering movement. Hammer labels the CIO the enterprise's chief process officer"

“CIO as Chief Process Officer, Not Strategic Leader”



Bestseller Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution (HarperCollins, 1993). Companies could radically improve their performance if they rethought and rebuilt their processes, spurred the transformation of businesses around the world. A former computer science professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Hammer heads Hammer and Co., a management consultancy that specializes in business process.

Hammer sees the chief information officer well positioned in the enterprise to be a catalyst for corporate transformation. While he argues that process management improvements must be led by senior, business-line executives, he says CIOs can play a pivotal role as chief process officers.

A chief process officer, Hammer says, is an organization's chief of staff for process work, the center of its expertise and the keeper of its skills and methodology. Michael Hammer's interview with CIO contributing editor John McCormick, expands his idea and insights into how CIOs can be effective chief process officers. Edited version of their conversation continues here

CIO INSIGHT: We've been studying process management and process improvement for years, but it seems many companies flounder when trying to figuring out how to improve their processes. Why is that?

MICHAEL HAMMER: Many organizations have made a lot of progress. It's also important to distinguish between process improvement and process management. Without getting too technical, process improvement is not as hard to do because it doesn't involve much organizational change. Process management, on the other hand, involves a lot of organizational change, and that's fundamentally what makes it hard to do.

The issue with process management is that it requires new managerial responsibilities in the organization. Someone has to take responsibility for processes that cross organizational boundaries. The title we often use for this role is process owner. And the challenge is that the process owner takes authority away from functional managers.

That doesn't happen so much with process improvement because functional managers can make their own local improvements. But process management really entails a transfer of authority from functional managers to process owners, and that's a very difficult shift.

Because it involves so much fundamental change, this only can happen if it's driven from the top of the enterprise. This is not something that happens bottom up. And the problem is that in a lot of organizations the senior leadership is distracted by other things, unfamiliar with these ideas, and so is unready to do anything about them, or not focused on operational issues because they're accustomed to business being easy over the last several years.

In a variety of ways—not just because of the credit problem [collapse of the subprime mortgage industry]—it's a much tougher time in business. And I think this is directing more and more people to pay attention to operations generally and their cross-functional processes specifically.

CIO As a Catalyst Not a Leader CIOs usually have a pretty good view of the corporation and understand how processes work. Are CIOs better able to effect these types of business management changes compared with other executives?

HAMMER: In general—there are exceptions to everything—the CIO is not in a position to drive and lead this effort. It can only be done by a senior, business-line executive.

But the CIO is extremely well positioned to be what I call a catalyst, where the CIO—because IT sits outside the various functions—really has a bird's-eye perspective on the process issues in the enterprise.

In fact, a lot of these process issues often show up in systems terms. And the CIO can really be the catalyst to alert senior executive management to the problems with processes and to the opportunities that process management presents.

Once an organization gets going with processes, the CIO often becomes what I call the chief process officer. The chief process officer is not the boss of the process owners. The chief process officer is sort of the organization's chief of staff for process work, the center of expertise, the keeper of skills and methodology. And we see more and more organizations where the CIO takes on this additional role of chief process officer.

If you're the chief process officer—the change agent within the company that's bringing about these process management improvements—where do you start?

HAMMER: The first thing to do is to assess your readiness as an organization to proceed. Do you have the leadership? Do you have the right culture in the organization? And if not, you have to start working on those gaps.

What you need to do is identify your processes. If you don't know what they are, you're nowhere.

You also need to do a major assessment of those processes in terms of some key issues: What's the status of the design of that process? Do you have one? Is it a good one or not? What about the metrics? Do you have end-to-end metrics or not? Do you have a process owner or not? Do the people who work in the process understand it? Does your infrastructure, which includes your IT systems, support the process?

Based on that audit, you've identified what issues you need to work on. And so you say, "OK, I'm pretty good in process owner, not good in process metrics. Let me work on process metrics."

Process and Enterprise Maturity Model This audit is embedded in something you call the Process and Enterprise Maturity Model, a tool that helps companies plan and manage business transformations. Please explain PEMM ...

HAMMER: There are two parts to it. One is the maturity of your enterprise. The other is the maturity of individual processes.

The first thing you do is set up the maturity of your enterprise. There are four things you look at there. Do you have knowledgeable, committed leadership at the executive level? Do you have a corporate culture that supports process? Do you have institutionalized expertise in the organization? Do you have a governance mechanism for managing process projects?

You use the model to identify any gaps and weaknesses. If you have them, you need to address them, because you won't get anywhere on your process without that.

That'll lead you, for instance, to say, "Gee, I need to strengthen my leadership." Then you, the CIO, would deal with your executive team, educating them, communicating with them, getting them to understand the problems that poor-performing processes lead to and so on.

Once you've made progress in understanding where you are enterprisewide, you can begin to use the process part of it—namely, looking at individual processes and asking yourself: Do we have owners for them? Do we have designs? Do we have metrics and so on? That gives you a plan for how you go about filling those gaps.

How and what exactly do you measure? That's always one of the toughest things for corporations to figure out. As you pointed out in previous works, a lot of companies do that poorly.

HAMMER: Yes. Metrics are a big problem because most metrics are functional, historical and financial. Those aren't the kind of metrics we need. We need real-time, or at least current, metrics, we need end-to-end process metrics, and we need metrics that measure much more than financial performance, but things like speed, customer satisfaction, quality and the like.

I wrote an article for the Spring 2007 [MIT] Sloan Management Review called "The Seven Deadly Sins of Performance Measurement and How to Avoid Them." It provides some guidance on how to develop metrics.

Basically you need to identify your key strategic business goals and which of your processes impact those goals.

So, for example, being first to market with new products is a strategic goal; the processes that impact that are things like product development. Speed or product development becomes the key metric you have to focus on to achieve your strategic objective. That's a real crude summary of what that article suggests.

Good and Bad of Metrics The Sloan Management Review article says many of the metrics we use are worthless ...

HAMMER: Organizations, to be blunt, really screw this up a lot.

It's mind-boggling how bad most organizations are with metrics. It's just shocking. You would think this is something they would have fixed a long time ago, but it's a persistent problem.

It seems that corporations consistently fall back into the seven deadly sins you define: vanity, or measuring just what you're good at; provincialism, or measuring just your department's part in a process instead of the entire process; narcissism, or measuring corporate goals instead of customer satisfaction; laziness, or not taking the time to figure out what should really be measured; pettiness, or measuring just small pieces of a process; inanity, or not considering the drain your measurement will have on the organization; and frivolity, or not taking measurements seriously.

HAMMER: They continue to make these same mistakes because those mistakes are a consequence of a lack of executive attention to the issue, complacency, not focusing end to end.

I know some organizations that have done a terrific job, but a lot still have a long way to go.

There's a number of business process management software tools on the market. Do they help, and if so, how much or how little?

HAMMER: My attitude about the business process management software is that it won't hurt, but it's not going to do you all that much good.

The critical elements in success with process are executive leadership, creativity to come up with new ideas, the management of change and the management of complex implementation. None of these have much to do with software tools. Yes, BPM software can help you model your processes, can help you in some cases simulate them, and in some case will allow you to create real-time support systems for your processes. It can't hurt. But it's not the difference between success and failure, not at this stage, at least.

Other software tools help organizations get a handle on their processes: knowledge management tools, business intelligence tools. Don't they all have a place?

HAMMER: Yes, but again, they are components that can support you in a process management effort.

My attitude is the same about them. They can't hurt unless you put too much attention on them and if you delude yourself into thinking they make the difference between success and failure.

Process First, Technology Second How important is making sure people are ready to adapt to the change? Obviously, that plays a huge role in any process ...

HAMMER: It does. The problem is, a lot of organizations don't want to bother with it. They think it's easy. They think it's not important.

What it really requires is sort of empathizing with people in the organization and what they're experiencing, communicating with them much more than you think you need to, listening to their concerns, giving them support during a transition, showing them you're absolutely committed, readjusting the reward system to encourage them. And, it's very doable. It just requires serious commitment.

Giving them the tools so they can do their jobs better.

HAMMER: Precisely. Training, education and tools.

If you talk to a group of CIOs who want to be catalysts for business process management, business process improvement, what are the two or three things you would tell them to do?

HAMMER: No. 1, educate yourselves about it. Make sure you really understand it, not just know a few catchwords.

Secondly, start working on getting the senior executive team comfortable with the concept, which often includes taking them on a visit to other companies that are doing well with it.

And, certainly, start pilot projects right away, because you need pilot projects to demonstrate to the organization that this stuff really works.

I'm reminded of an article you wrote about a retailer that wanted to find out how many people who went into its store bought something. They just hired a bunch of kids to count the people who went in and then count the ones who came out with something.

HAMMER: Right. They were measuring the percentage of customers who actually bought something.

There is a temptation among people in the IT world to look for technological solutions before they're needed.

Look, I used to be a professor of computer science at MIT, so it's not as though I'm afraid of computers. But I know people who will use a computer to do something as long as it's not too much more awkward than doing it manually. So somehow using a computer is a virtue in itself.

A good rule of thumb—it's not always doable—is try to implement new processes without technology, and afterward bring in technology to boost them rather than make them dependent on technology out of the box.

Isn't that almost the reverse of what companies do today?

HAMMER: Yes, but the companies that take the approach I just described are often very successful with it because it gets clarity about their processes. Otherwise, you end up with what I call paving the cow path; you're overlaying new technology on a bad process.

Which companies are the best at process management? You've mentioned some, such as Air Products and Chemicals, in your work. Could you name a couple more?

HAMMER: There are quite a lot. Naming 20 would be easy. Naming just two or three is hard. A few, off the top of my head: Shell; PepsiCo, especially in Latin America; and Tetra Pak, a company based in Europe that makes packaging equipment.

What characteristics make them successful?

HAMMER: Overwhelmingly No. 1 is executive commitment. Second is "thoroughgoing"—in other words, they did it by the book and they addressed everything that needed to be addressed. They didn't leave stuff out. Those probably are the two most important things

Empathezing with People How important is making sure people are ready to adapt to the change? Obviously, that plays a huge role in any process ...

HAMMER: It does. The problem is, a lot of organizations don't want to bother with it. They think it's easy. They think it's not important.

What it really requires is sort of empathizing with people in the organization and what they're experiencing, communicating with them much more than you think you need to, listening to their concerns, giving them support during a transition, showing them you're absolutely committed, readjusting the reward system to encourage them. And, it's very doable. It just requires serious commitment.

Giving them the tools so they can do their jobs better.

HAMMER: Precisely. Training, education and tools.

If you talk to a group of CIOs who want to be catalysts for business process management, business process improvement, what are the two or three things you would tell them to do?

HAMMER: No. 1, educate yourselves about it. Make sure you really understand it, not just know a few catchwords.

Secondly, start working on getting the senior executive team comfortable with the concept, which often includes taking them on a visit to other companies that are doing well with it.

And, certainly, start pilot projects right away, because you need pilot projects to demonstrate to the organization that this stuff really works.

Source: CIO Insight October 3, 2007

Read More......

Monday, May 21, 2007

Go with feeling and attitude

“Business psychology experts Kaisen have come up with a formula that helps companies grow at all levelsRoger Eglin ”



Tim Morgan joined the financial-services group Alexander Forbes four-and-a-half years ago, the management team was full of passion but somewhat light on senior management skills. Their passions also tended to get the better of them sometimes.

The company had grown by acquisition and accumulated a disparate group of managers. Its business covered financial advice, offshore tax, healthcare, personal finance and trustee services.

Some staff development was taking place at the firm, including coaching, but Morgan was worried that people tended to stick within their own little boxes. What he wanted was a broader approach with people prepared to look at the bigger picture.

He wanted them to think more about their relationships with their colleagues, particularly about how what they were doing would be received.

Morgan said he wanted to know how they could work with each other for the greater good.

The coaching and development was useful but something was needed to “take it up an extra notch”. Alexander Forbes put the project out to tender and looked at a number of firms, before settling on Kaisen, a Bristol-based business-psychology consultancy.

“They were one of the few firms I have come across that said they wanted to do an individual assessment of everyone from our side,” said Morgan, managing director of financial services.

Kaisen said a full assessment of all staff members would help Alexander Forbes to draw up an action plan. So they were tested with case studies where they were asked how they would deal with problems. “They really went into us,” said Morgan.

It was around this time that employees were introduced to Kaisen’s mantra, FAB — short for feelings, attitude and behaviour — developed just over a year ago. It is a technique whereby psychological insights unearthed in individual assessments help to identify the skills shortfalls that have to be overcome to improve leadership at all levels.

Morgan quickly began to notice a difference. People’s behaviour started to change. In the boardroom two directors who had constantly been at loggerheads became much more co-operative. “They were beginning to interact quite a bit better than they had been doing,” he said.

Robert Myatt, a Kaisen consultant, said: “We find out where the skills shortages are and work with individual leaders to overcome them.”

The FAB programme is based on five “desired outcomes”: good teamwork, improved performance, innovation,

FAB has been tested extensively at M&S Money, the store card and financial-services brand owned by HSBC. Earlier this year Kaisen gave each M&S Money manager eight days’ training on the FAB programme. The course content focused on problems and tricky situations the manager was likely to encounter in the workplace.

Using its database of 10,000 senior managers and other research, Kaisen has studied leadership and the development opportunities that are available.

Roger Coveney, a Kaisen director, (pictured) said: “There are lots of programmes that deal with self-awareness if you want to become a better leader. But we felt they didn’t tackle the whole issue. They weren’t always cohesive.

“Some programmes drew their example from the sporting world but, although this sort of thing had some value, you had to ask if it transferred to the business world.”

It was at this point that Kaisen identified the five outcomes. “If you can achieve these things you will be successful as a business leader,” said Coveney.

Leaders are shown how to achieve these outcomes by using psychological techniques to sharpen staff behaviour and encourage the communication of emotions, to convey authority and integrity, to deliver effective motivation and show that their teams are valued.

Myatt said: "Leaders have to create the right conditions for the key outcomes" we have identified as essential for getting the best out of the workforce.

"Most leadership programmes give endless broad-brush theory. Kaisen provides individually tailored sessions in practical skills, delivered by experts," he said. "We believe that leadership development should start with individuals really knowing themselves. It is not just about teaching a new set of techniques. Leaders need to understand their own psychology — in particular which aspects of their personality are holding them back."

One of FAB’s success stories is William Hill, the bookmaker. So far 60 managers have completed the course, with another 130 approaching the finishing line.

When Jo Brown joined the company two years ago she was asked to introduce management-development programmes. The firm had already been using Kaisen for profiling executives, and the top management told Brown that they wanted to continue with the employees.

This was quite a change. Until the company went public, its management style had been very much "command and control", with managers taking their cue from the people above them rather than exercising any initiative. But Brown said the programme had received strong support from senior management and after 18 months was showing every sign of being a great success.

"It started at the top and has received strong support all the way through," said Brown.

Among the benefits have been a new style of working, with people focusing on what is important and being encouraged to do it "quicker and smarter rather than harder".

Source: Times Newspapers - November 26, 2006

Read More......