Strategy, Change on the Horizon

/ nuleadership / 31 Comments

In a world of hypercompetitive environments, organizations fight to survive in severe economic conditions. Shareholders replace CEOs like they change defective light bulbs. It is frequent and unpredictable.  In hopes of salvaging the latest struggling organization, executives usually implement quick solutions by cutting costs (which translates to mean people) and attempting to stop the hemorrhaging through technology. Yet, can today’s managers continue to do the same things and expect different results? 

No! Today’s challenges are calling for a different methodology. Strategic thinking represents a different solution for contemporary managers. Strategic thinking is more than careful planning of the organization’s work. Strategic thinking consists of two components, which are knowledge about the present and foresight about the future. Let’s go deeper.  

 Some managers foolishly rely solely on their experience to read market changes. Yet, the current market isn’t like the past! In many situations, managers are equipped to deal with the predictable.  Change that is either planned or incremental is addressed with a risk management approach. However, disruptive change is the hallmark of today’s markets.

Disruptive change is sudden and unpredictable. Therefore, experience becomes a liability, not an asset. Organizations, using the old mode of operations, find themselves vulnerable. Established institutions fail. Unknown companies emerge to dominate new sectors. Clayton Christensen, author of Innovative Dilemma, attributes this phenomenon to disruptive innovation.  Therefore, survival depends on understanding the current markets and future trends.

Strategic leaders are needed in today’s organizations. Charles Handy, author of The Age of Unreason, argues “Discontinuous change requires discontinuous thinking. If the new way of doing things is going to be different from the old, not just an improvement on it, then we shall need to look at everything in a new way.” 

 Watt Wacker, Jim Taylor, and Howard Means, leadership gurus, suggest a visionary leader with the capacity of ‘living in the present’ while ‘living in the future.” Therefore, duality becomes a critical attribute of exemplary organizations.

Clearly, strategic thinking is different than routine planning of an organization. Unfortunately, some managers are unaware how this process can assist them in being competitive. Strategic thinking can be characterized in the following ways: (a) focusing on important issues, (b) selecting relevant information, (c) recognizing systematic properties (linkages, patterns, etc.), (d) distinguishing causes from effect, (e) maintaining a long-term view, (f) appreciating consequences, (g) generating alternatives, (h) integrating logical with creative, divergent thinking, (i) remaining flexible, and (j) acting during crises.  

Since contemporary organizations can no longer use outdated methods and cookie cutter solutions in this disruptive environment, managers must reexamine their operations. In fact, leaders must be flexible to sudden market changes. Therefore, effective organizations go beyond detailed planning to strategic thinking.

At what levels of management would strategic thinking be best utilized? Do you feel that workers should be equipped with some type of training to detect disruptive change in the market?  How can you influence your organization to think strategically?

© 2010 by Daryl D. Green

A Leader’s Attitude Adjustment

/ nuleadership / 29 Comments

In the movie Remember the Titans, the story follows the integration of two high schools in Virginia. Herman Boone (Denzel Washington) is hired as head football coach in a very emotionally charged situation. At any point, something bad could erupt.  Yet, the movie captures the attitude transformation of the team. The team captain, who was an All-American defensive player, finds himself complaining about the selfishness of another player. Yet, this captain wasn’t supporting the head coach’s philosophy of becoming a successful team. Only when the leaders on the team supported the team strategy did the team start being successful.  

Good leaders understand the importance of a good attitude in building an effective organization. Everyone loves a winner, but many people forget the struggles to the top. Yet, emerging leaders understand the need for teambuilding and leadership development. In the textbook Contemporary Management, Gareth Jones and Jennifer George make the case for greater emotional intelligence by managers.

Emotional intelligence (EI) is the ability to understand and manage one’s own mood as well as the mood of others.  They argue that managers will better be able to relate to their employees. Understanding employees as well as customers is a necessity for successful organizations.  Jim Cathcart, sales expert, further suggests that the attitude of a salesperson can make or break a sale. He notes that customers want to know that the salesperson cares about them. Is it different in your industry?

Given this framework, managers would understand that it does not ay to exhibit a bad attitude with their workers. According to a Carnegie Foundation survey, 85% of an individual’s success in life is attributed to a person’s ability to deal with people and manage his or her self. Therefore, a positive attitude by manages may contribute greatly toward organizational profitability in the long run.

Great leaders can set the tone for an organization. In fact, leadership expert Dr. Bruce Winston notes that employees want leaders who can move an organization in a positive direction during stormy times.  Furthermore, John C. Maxell, author of The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership, argues the significance of a good attitude:

“If you want outstanding results, you need good people with great talent and awesome attitudes. When attitudes go up, so does the potential of the team.”

When a selfish person leads an organization, it can have a negative impact on the organization. In fact, a bad attitude can damage the work culture. The results can go well beyond the bottom-line for most corporations.  Therefore, a good attitude does matter, Captain!

 Does your organization support the concept of EI? If not, why?  How do leaders ensure that they have the right attitude for the job?

© 2010 by Daryl D. Green

A Return to Agrarian Leadership

/ nuleadership / 20 Comments

In order to improve leaders’ value systems, we need to regain the values of agrarian society. Leadership expert Vana Prewitt argues that the current leadership theories are based on modernist assumptions and are out of date with leading today’s postmodern organizations. Given this dilemma, I advocate for a different kind of 21st leadership. 

 Agrarian leadership is defined as a contextual influence that has an impact on subordinates’ attitudes and performance by leaders who are both value and results driven. Agrarian leaders view their followers as critical parts of the socio-technical system. Therefore, technology does not drive the value system of society.

Before the Industrial Revolution, life was centered on land and labor. Life was simple for the leader in agrarian society. Rural living revolved around the land; owning it was equivalent to self-sufficiency and liberty. Although Americans lived in a tribal structure prior to the Agrarian Era (1650-1849), farming communities operated in a decentralized economy.

Agrarians exercised a strong spirituality and a deep respect for the environment. There was a genuine concern for neighbors and co-workers. Being a leader was a major responsibility. In fact, farmers were like heroes because of their hard work, contributions to society, independence, and moral standards. A man’s word meant something. With the transition from an agrarian to industrial society, untainted leadership was lost.

The Industry Revolution meant major changes to the American way of life. Before that period, over 90% of Americans lived rurally. Farmers influenced society. Between 1870 and1900, rural areas doubled and urban areas tripled. Farmers were cautious about these societal changes.

Industrial managers faced challenges such as generating new efficiencies while expanding operations. Chaos theory was in effect because those managers couldn’t control these organizational changes (both inside and outside). Factory managers lacked a process to motivate the unskilled (former agrarian) workforce. This era created new advances and new problems.

The Industrial Revolution forever changed agrarian society, primarily due to market economy and technology. Farmers were less self-sufficient and became “economic market” slaves. This created conflict because farmers and industrial society had different values. Farming became more productive, but fewer farmers were needed.

As a result of these advances, farmers lost their independence, family focus, and societal influence on moral conduct.  For example, some managers found factory workers breaking equipment. Consequently, managers tried to institute positive and negative rewards; these managers used conventional wisdom: “the hungriest man makes the best worker.”  Once again, mankind was moving away from his calling—the land.   

Therefore, advances in technology do not always equate to a better society. Many techno advocates would argue that technology has provided superior virtues. I beg to differ. First, technology doesn’t automatically improve society. In over 50 years, America has gone from rural to city and from national to international markets. Richard Critchfield, author of Trees, Why Do You Wait: America’s Changing Rural Culture, argues that these advancements have weakened our core values such as family tradition and work ethic.

Secondly, the disintegration of the agrarian code has destroyed our moral stability. Osha Davidson, author of Broken Heartlands, suggests that technology and the economic prestige of the agricultural system brought a host of social ills such as poverty, depopulation, and soil erosion.

Finally, we may consider agrarian lifestyle primitive. However, agrarian values shouldn’t be forgotten as good leadership attributes. We continue to advance technology by leaps and bounds while the values of society continue to disintegrate with each innovation.  In society, many leaders exhibit unethical conduct, pursuing wealth. Throughout American history, we see the consequences.

Do you feel that agrarian leadership is a term that will fit in the Green Economy? Can today’s leaders acquire, develop, or revitalize agrarian values in their leaders in the 21st century? If so, how?

 © 2010 by Daryl D. Green

Spotting Unethical Leadership in 2010

/ nuleadership / 28 Comments

 Today, many employees grumble when their leaders discuss being ethical. During the massive economic downturn, many executives got rewarded for underperforming. For example, Fannie Mae’s CEO Michael Williams and Freed CEO Charles Haldeman Jr. were slated to receive up to $6 million each for 2009 despite the companies’ poor performance. Yet, it cost the American taxpayers more than $100 million for these company bailouts. With the continual unethical behavior of several executives, American workers are more cynical about their leaders than ever.

Ethics plays a critical role in good leadership. Ethics is defined as the code of moral principles that governs the behavior of a person or group according to what is right. Richard Draft, an organization management expert, explains that leaders at the highest management levels develop internal moral standards that can often allow them to break laws if necessary. 

For many organizations, it is the proverbial “doing as I say and not as I do” for some managers.  Most managers can get away with this philosophy. As businesses continue to falter and competition begins to bear down on the economy, workers are looking for leadership. However, it is virtually impossible to lead an organization if you’re unethical. Unfortunately, it only takes one bad manager to destroy the core values of an organization. Here are some ways to identify an unethical leader:

This unethical leader…

1. Leads with a bad attitude
2. Lies to his followers and peers
3. Takes advantage of people
4. Takes personal credit for group accomplishments
5. Uses politics to gain power in an amoral manner
6. Does not focus on the common good of the organization
7. Does not support his followers
8. Displays a “double-tongued” behavior
9. Sacrifices his followers for personal gain
10. Fails to model the way for followers

Emerging leaders cannot afford to behave unethical. People become less trusting of organizations and people. People, especially leaders, need to act in a manner that sets the example for the rest of the organization. Therefore, it can be concluded that effective leaders must be careful to stay humble and have accountability mechanisms in place so that they won’t hit any ethical mine fields. Organizations can’t afford to wait.

Can today’s unethical behavior be stopped? If so, how? If not, how can today’s organizations minimize their losses?

Uncertain World Needs Good Leadership

/ nuleadership / 4 Comments

Welcome to the Nu Leadership Revolution! This blog explores the changing workforce and social environment as it relates to emerging leaders.  The status quo will not do! “Nu” represents a change from the old ways of doing things at least for emerging leaders.   

Our lives continue to unravel as things we believe in disintegrate before our eyes.  Institutions are failing. Personal conduct is at an all time low. Wall Street continues to prosper as Main Street bears the financial hardship for our country.  

Everyone is impacted–from the executive to the factory worker.  According to the Conference Board research group, only 45% of Americans are satisfied with their work.  This was the lowest level ever recorded by this group over 22 years of researching this area. One major reason cited was that workers do not find their jobs interesting.  In order to be more competitive, organizations need to retool and inspire workers to new levels of performance. Clearly, organizations need good leadership.

What is needed, however, is a different kind of leader during these times of uncertainty. How can you become a stronger, more effective leader? I feel this revolution will start with a fresh, positive outlook from a new kind of engaging leader. Kevin Kelly, who helped launched Wired Magazine, noted,

“Wealth in the new regime flows directly from innovation, not optimization; that is, wealth is not gained by perfecting the known, but by imperfectly seizing the unknown.”

For over 20 years, I have tried to guide and inspire thousands through my lectures, seminars, and columns. As I speak to the issues facing organizations and emerging leaders, I solicit your input and insight.  Therefore, I ask that you join me on a journey towards improved leadership and personal empowerment.

 © 2010 by Daryl D. Green