Posts tagged 'Development':

Leadership Formula for Success

October 17, 2011

Posted by in Blog, Thought Leadership with no comments

Have you ever
taken a course and placed the workbook on the shelf, never looking at it
again?  If your answer is “yes” just as
it is for most of us, it just means you haven’t either held yourself
accountable or you haven’t been held accountable by your manager.  The following leadership formula for success
is a way to get more out of your training investments.  Since taking a workshop delivered by
Introspect International in 2003, I’ve been able to better reinforce effective
use of training, but it was more about the changes in me rather than the
changes in others.

According to Scott
Crandall, Principal of Trinity-Lincoln
Consulting
, starting around July every year, training departments begin
receiving e-mails and phone calls around the same topic:

“Such-and-such
course is on my annual plan, and I need to get signed up.”

This should remind
us of a statistic from the British consulting firm Lane4:

At least 80% of
all corporate training cannot be linked
back to any performance improvement, let alone a business-related improvement
resulting in Return on Investment.

Considering that
over $134 Billion is spent annually, that’s a staggering
implication.

The
Secret Formula

However,
there issolution.
Consider this equation:

ET + LR = BC
–>  ROI

It means Effective
Training
(ET) and Leadership
Reinforcement
(LR) result in Changed Behavior
(BC), which leads to Return on Investment
(ROI).

The corollary is
also true: Effective Training (or development) without
Leadership Reinforcement will NOT result in Changed
Behavior
or ROI.

Ideally, the equation
would read:  ET + IA = BC –>  ROI, where IA stood for “Individual
Application
”.

In other words, if
people came back from training, eager to apply the new techniques
they learned (and actually did it!), effective training (or development) might
be all that was needed.

Instead, isn’t
this the more common post-training response:

Back from 2 or 3
days away, people realize they’ve got 90 or 100 e-mails to wade through, two
dozen voicemails, and they’re behind!  They glance wistfully
at the training notebook, swearing to look at it “as soon as things calm down a
little,” and up on the shelf it goes, never to be seen again.

Honestly, isn’t
that what most post-training becomes?

The evidence says
this is common for over 80% of us.

Two
Conversations and a Follow Up Plan

So how
can we change it?

Knowing that the
“IA” – by itself – is unrealistic. As leaders. we must provide the
“LR”.

One question we
need to look at then is what exactly makes up “leadership reinforcement.”
Leadership Reinforcement, at its essence,
consists of three things: two conversations and
an accountability plan.

Conversation Number
1

The first
conversation should be an outgrowth of the annual plan. What training or
development actions did you agree upon with the person?  Assuming that the
plan itself is effective, within a week or two before the person attends a
training course or developmental opportunity, you need to have a conversation.

This talk should
initially
:

  • Discuss the developmental
    issues
    with the person
  • Agree why you
    want them
    to attend the training in the first place
  • Express your expectations for what
    you want them
    to get out of the training
  • Tell them to what they should pay
    particular attention
  • Discuss their
    reaction
    and expectations
  • Convey how you expect their behavior
    to change
    when they return.

In other words, if
you want a particular output, you must ensure that the inputs
are correct.

The bottom line,
however, is this: When your employees leave to attend training, they must know
precisely what your joint expectations are, what to pay particular attention
to, and they should begin thinking – during training – about how they’ll apply
it.

In this way your
employees will be more focused when they attend training or participate in
developmental activities.  They’ll be more engaged, listening and watching
more intently, asking better questions, doing their homework, and making sure
they’ll meet your joint expectations.  People at training courses would be
there for a purpose (one they understood and agreed with.)

Everybody wins in those situations.

Conversation Number
2

The second
conversation happens once the employee gets back.

  • You should ask them to identify
    the “Big Rocks”
    that they got from the training.
  • What were the major
    impacts
    they received?
  • What are they going
    to do
    about them?
  • Specifically, how are they going to perform
    their job differently
    than before they went
    away?
  • Have this conversation
    in detail
  • Make notes
  • Set dates for specific accomplishments
  • Then follow up!

If Action A was to
be completed by September 15, check in with them on the 15th (not
the 16th) to see how they did.  Hold their feet to the fire,
closely verify the details.  Check randomly after that date, but make sure
the committed actions or changes are truly completed, and implemented to your
satisfaction.  Praise their efforts and reward their
accomplishments.  Don’t allow their completed commitments to pass in
ignored or overlooked silence.

This silence is
deafening in the corporate world.

The Plan

This reinforcement
method is a golden opportunity to do several things.

  1. It improves your people’s
    performance
    (and the business performance of your team)
    and makes them more productive employees.
  2. Praise and feedback are the
    greatest motivators
    there are
  3. Motivated employees have higher
    morale
    and productivity
  4. Satisfied people stay, so your
    attrition
    , recruiting, and related
    costs
    are lower
  5. Higher morale and productivity
    brings improved business results

I don’t know about
you, but I don’t see any downside to “Leadership Reinforcement.”

Share

The Art of Action

August 19, 2011

Posted by in Blog, Thought Leadership with no comments

In The Art of Action: How Leaders Close the Gaps Between Plans, Actions and Results,
author Stephen Bungay makes an audacious claim: Business in the 21st century
age of globalization and the Internet can learn much about strategy, leadership
and management from the 19th century Prussian army — and specifically two of
its great generals, Carl von Clausewitz and Helmuth von Moltke. Bungay is in a
unique position to write such a book as a long-time consultant with the Boston Consulting Group, Bungay is also an acclaimed military historian who has published books on the battles of Britain
and Alamein.

The Three Challenges

In studying the effectiveness of military strategy, Clausewitz, in his seminal tome, On War, blamed failures in
military strategy on internal friction — which caused a gap between planned
actions and actual actions — and external friction — which caused a gap between
desired outcomes and actual outcomes. In other words, because of internal
friction (lack of leadership or poor communication, for example), people didn’t
do what they were supposed to do; and because of external friction (which can
be anything from bad weather to unexpected reactions of the enemy), the actions
undertaken by military units didn’t lead to the expected results.

Bungay adapts and refines Clausewitz’s approach. When a company develops a
strategy for success, he writes, it develops a plan that describes what actions
the company will take in order to achieve its desired outcomes.

The problem is that there are gaps between these three elements: plans, actions
and outcomes. Because of a knowledge gap — the difference between what we need
to know and what we actually know — our plans don’t lead to the intended
outcomes. An alignment gap occurs between plans and actions when people don’t
take the actions that we planned for them to take. Finally, there is the
effects gap between actions and outcomes: Our actions don’t lead to the
outcomes we had expected.

Directed Opportunism

To close these gaps, Bungay turns to von Moltke, who created the Prussian
army’s basic operating model — still in effect today in Germany
and the model for America’s mission command
model. Bungay adapts von Moltke’s principles into an approach he calls
“directed opportunism.”

With directed opportunism, the plans created at the upper levels of companies
are not detailed strategies with often multiple objectives based on extensive
knowledge. Instead, they define and communicate a clear but more general intent
or objective for the company.

Communication is key because it’s at each of the levels below that intent is
translated into specific actions. In other words, each level receives a message
from the next level up that explains what needs to be achieved and why (the
intent), but it is up to the people at that level to decide what actions to
take. Thus, they decide how to align their actions to the strategic intent.
Finally, in implementing the actions, individuals have the freedom to adjust
their actions to adapt to different circumstances, although always guided by
the overall intent of the strategy. As a result, actions have a greater chance
of leading to the intended outcomes.

The principles behind directed opportunism are clear. There should be less
control from the top and more flexibility allowed for initiative and adjustment
to take place at the lower levels. However, there must also be clearly defined
and communicated goals or outcomes from the upper levels so that lower-level
initiatives do not take the company off the intended path of the strategy.

Directed opportunism is exemplified in an essay written by Prince Friedrich Karl
of Prussia, the commander of the Prussian army. A staff officer carries out an order
without question. A high-ranking general takes him to task, saying, “The
King made you a staff officer because you should know when not to obey.”
This is a key lesson for leaders at any level of an organization to take away
from Bungay’s teachings.

 

I’ve had opportunities to manage teams in both Mexico and Puerto Rico that had
authority to make decisions as they saw fit to achieve the goals of the
organization.  I couldn’t be there all the time and time was money in the world of manufacturing.

I would even, depending on the nature of the decision, sit back and allow the Directors to “make the call” on things I would
have decided on in my earlier years.  This gave me valuable insight as to their abilities to evaluate the
information, develop alternatives and decide on the one that generated the best
result.

 

The phrase “Sometimes it’s better to seek forgiveness rather than ask for permission”
rang true on my team.  The leaders certainly made their share of mistakes, but being in a position to take
ownership of business issues gave them priceless experience.

The Art
of Action
is a fascinating read, and a thoughtful,
learned analysis of corporate strategy and leadership today. Although based on
history, this is not a book about the past. It is a guide for creating and
managing the future.

Share

Retaining Your Best People (second in a series)

May 2, 2011

Posted by in Blog with no comments

Another reason employees remain loyal to organizations is the level of personal development and opportunity available to them.

The employees you want to retain are learners. They want to know more about things. They thrive on being given the opportunity to understand the business better. Give them an “in” on some useful information, ask their opinion about it or ask them to study and report on it, and you’ve got an employee that brings more value to their employer, and vice versa. It’s rare this employee will flee.
Your best employees also appreciate your integrity on follow-through. If you discuss sending them to a 2-day leadership seminar or helping on a new project during their performance review, put a date in writing by which they will attend or join the new team. We suggest you not be vague when it comes to development, because if you are, your best employee may think, “I guess they don’t care after all.” Read more »

Share

Retaining Your Best People (first in a series)

April 19, 2011

Posted by in Blog with no comments

Business hasn’t been great these past few years. You’ve tightened the belt and with scarce competitive prospects, didn’t have to worry so much about losing your best employees. If you did any hiring, you found outstanding employees readily available on the market. However, with profits up and demand expanding, 2011 is simply different. Will you be able to retain your key people when employment opportunities expand too?

Let’s first discuss the big gorilla in the room… the number one reason employees leave is that they don’t like or get along with their supervisor. Even the best leaders have team members with whom conversations are strained, business debates are awkward, and no meaningful relationship is established. And, even if you don’t perceive these challenges to apply to you, your staff may.

One proactive (or reactive, if you’re already seeing strain or lack of retention) solution is to collect data on the work environment. Consider these three approaches: Read more »

Share

Affiliations

IACPR
Pinnacle Society
NAPS

Global Partners

Madison MacArthur
Toronto, Ontario

Our Canadian partner in IRC Global Executive Search was founded in 1994 and was featured in Business Week's Most Influential Headhunters in the World List!



DRH-Talent Search
Sao Paulo, Brazil

Our Brazilian partner in IRC Global Executive Search was founded in 2001. DRH is led by Hamilton Teixeira, a former C-level executive of Kellogg, Bausch & Lomb, Timex, and Rayovac.

Testimonials

Testimonials

Connect With Us!


 

Want to speak with a live person? Call (619) 661-2585 between the hours of 8:30am and 5:30pm (Pacific Standard Time) Monday through Friday.

823 Anchorage Place
Chula Vista, CA, 91914