ValuExecBlog

The trouble with holidays

The attached article is simply a side dish but I thought I would include it because as I was writing the article, the concept became more and more intriguing to me. The article comes from the January 2008 edition of our newsletter Valuable News and the basic concept is that if managers could tap into the holiday mood of their employees during the first 5 days back in office after a long national holiday, they will be able to set the 'emotional mood' or quotient of the company/department for the next 3 months. The trouble is we never do tap into it and that is a waste.

There is no major research to back up the argument, but it is an intriguing concept that will require further study, I think.

Happy reading.

Download valuablenews_january2008_the_trouble_with_holidays_ex_temp.pdf

ian

If you are serious about talent

Some time ago I was interviewed for a senior role in a large pharmaceutical company. Why I was there in the first place is of no consequence, but I was. Sitting across the table from me was the HR Director (soon to be promoted into a regional role) and the Finance Director and in front of them both was a list of competencies and questions that had been drawn up for the role and which they were going to ask me. They informed me that they would be playing tag. One would ask a question followed by the other and this would continue until the end of the interview.

The interview was a complete dud and in no way would have provided the interviewers with any indication of how well I could have done the job. In fact, it soon became apparent that their primary goal was to get through the questions rather than see if I could do the job or whether I was a fit for the Company. They did not listen to my responses; they wrote few notes; they did not try and dig underneath the surface. So frustrating was the interview in fact, that I eventually stepped in and coached them as to the questions to ask. Were they going through the motions - yes? Would I have wanted to work there - probably not?

That interview and subsequent 'reference' interviews that I have been exposed to from recruitment companies, have lead me to believe that despite leaders knowing that there is a war for talent going on - companies have been either very slow to embrace methods that will help them win that war or that the message is not getting through to the lower levels within the company or for that matter to the recruitment companies that recruit for them. 

Deja Vu ~ Spilling the Beans

What is currently unfolding at Starbucks has left me with a sense of Deja Vu. The Starbucks saga reminds me of the return of Steve Jobs to Apple when he came back to lead that company out of the black hole in which it was slowly (or quickly) sliding. In both cases, the respective Boards turned to the Founders of the company to steady the sinking ship. The question is "why do Boards look to the Founders in time of need?"

If strategy defines the arena in which execution is played and if there is no doubt that bad strategy begets poor execution, then the strategy followed by James Donald, the former CEO of Starbucks, to accelerate market penetration by increasing the number of stores across the USA appears in hindsight, to have been a bad strategy. But hindsight is a wonderful thing and Donald did not have the benefit of hindsight. In addition, I can not believe that Donald did not have the backing of his Board, one of whom was none other than the man who has now replaced him, to pursue such a strategy. So what went wrong? Simply, the answer lies in an aspect of execution that although difficult to measure, is often overlooked when pursuing strategy but which is the fundamental reason why Boards so often turn to the Founders to bail them out.

Beware the wolf in sheep's clothing

I had the misfortune recently of joining a one hour teleclass that was touted as providing valuable lessons in the marketing of products on-line but which was nothing more than an infomercial for the host's numerous products and an opportunity for the host to make money on an unsuspecting and captive audience. I rated the teleclass as follows:

• Valuable content = 0
• Benefit to me = 0
• Time wastage = 60 minutes
• Trust Factor = 0
• Net Result = Never do business again with the person/company

You may well have asked why I didn't hang up and that would have been a valid question. But although tempted to do so, it occurred to me that people and businesses that rely on the Internet to sell their products or services were, I felt, beginning to cross that very thin line of trust between buyer and seller, if they had not already done so.

I have no doubt that these companies do offer a valuable service or product that can benefit their target audience. But I have to question the execution of their strategies. In instances where buyer and seller are not able to meet face-to-face, personal credibility is built through trust and I am not convinced that these people are doing enough to build that trust. Perhaps, competition is mudding their waters of integrity and intent. 

Some people or companies do get it right though. At one teleclass this week, the host spent 45 minutes talking about the topic and only that topic. He then spent a further 14 minutes fielding questions relating to the content of his teleclass and one minute providing his contact details should any of us feel the need to discuss the topic further or address issues that we had. There was no mention of his product range; there were no freebies; no extra courses offered for the first 25 people who signed up straight after the call. It was focused totally on the topic that we had all signed up for and for which we had taken 60 minutes out of our busy lives to stop what we were doing and listen to someone whom we had never met before. My rating for the teleclass:

• Valuable content = 100
• Benefit to me  = 100
• Time wastage - 0
• Trust = 100
• Net Result = Repeat business definitely likely.

As soon as the host of a teleclass says something along the lines of 'I cover this in a lot more detail in my program xxxxx which you can get if you go to my site xxxxxx at a cost of $xxx but if you are one of the first 25 people who buy the product (CD set) after this call, you can get loads of free material valued at $xxxx',' I think to myself, 'Oh, no! another wolf in sheep's clothing' and I immediately question their intent for holding the teleclass and my trust begins to wane. This is a pity because I am sure that they have a lot of wisdom to share from which we can all learn.

ian

The Web of Execution Excellence ~ What Nature Teaches Us

Picture if you will, a spider's web. Arising from a central core, are a few large, strong vertical strands that spread from the centre of the web to its outer fringes and which are attached to the external environment (be it a tree or a branch etc.) Each of these core strands in turn is connected horizontally by smaller strands similar to the rungs of a ladder, starting with the smallest strands at the bottom levels and moving to the larger horizontal strands at the top of the web. The larger vertical strands spreading from the core and attached to the environment determine the size and shape of the web whilst the smaller strands however, provide access for the spider to move from one end of the web to another. Together, both the vertical and horizontal strands provide the net with which to capture unsuspecting prey. 

Should one of the core vertical strands break, the web waves around in the wind and if not fixed and attached quickly to a branch or anything external, the whole web crumbles and folds like a deck of cards in the wind. Break any one of the smaller horizontal strands however, and the web although not broken, does nevertheless have a weakness, a gaping hole which if not fixed, allows prey to exploit it and to escape leading eventually to starvation and ultimately to death of the spider.

When looking at execution excellence within their corporation, CEO's would do well to see their organization as a spider's web connected to the external environment by core processes and with a number of support activities providing access and agility. Too often our leaders focus all their execution efforts on ensuring that the core strands are strong and firmly in place, but leave the management of the smaller execution strands to others. The argument being that, as we have seen with the spider's web, any destruction of the core strands will have immediate and dire consequences. But as we have also seen with the spider's web, the consequences of a broken smaller strand, although not immediately dire can, if not fixed, be as severe as the destruction of a larger strand. The adage being the web is only as strong as its weakest link.

The lesson being execution excellence requires that every aspect of the organization works together, is connected to the core processes, and is flexible to withstand gale force winds and change. If one strand is broken be it vertical or horizontal, it will impact the rest of the execution equation. It is simply not a question of "if" but merely a question of "when?"

Have a wonderful and prosperous 2008.

ian