by Virgil R. Carter
What’s the steady-state condition of your organization? Is it an exemplary organization? What does exemplary mean? Scott Keller and Colin Price, examine this question in a recent article “Organizational health: The ultimate competitive advantage”, published in the McKinsey Quarterly.
The authors content that “focusing on organizational health—the ability of your organization to align, execute, and renew itself faster than your competition can—is just as important as focusing on the traditional drivers of business performance.” The authors go on to explain, “Organizational health is about adapting to the present and shaping the future faster and better than the competition”. Their view is that the ultimate competitive advantage lies in an organization’s ability to “create a capacity to learn and keep changing over time”.
Now, many non-profit organizations are noted more for their continuity and consistency, than for their “learning and changing over time”. Do you agree? Some non-profit organizations even boast that “we’ve always done it that way!” So where does that leave health vs. performance of non-profits?
First, and foremost, every non-profit is unique. That is, each organization has its own history, culture, traditions and values. So “competitive advantage” can’t successfully be copied from other organizations and simply imported into a “host” non-profit organization. The authors point to their research that leads them to believe that health (the ability of an organization to align, execute and renew itself faster than the competition) is the basis for performance (what an organization delivers to stakeholders in financial and operational terms). “At least 50 percent of any organization’s long-term success” is the result of organizational health.
According to these authors, to improve organizations, with lasting results, leaders must “focus on (organizational) long-term health even as leaders push for higher performance. How is the long-term health of your organization?
For the full article, click here.
Friday, August 12, 2011
Monday, August 8, 2011
Killer Questions
by Virgil R. Carter
Want to know how your career can vanish before your eyes during an interview? The Wall Street Journal’s recent article “Seven Questions That Kill Careers” identifies these questions as ways to ensure you will have more free time (and less time at work):
1. So, tell me a little about yourself. This innocent-sounding question is a likely opening one. This is not where one describes one’s life history or most recent vacation frolic in Mexico. You may be best to simply make 1-2 brief comments about your most recent professional history.
2. Why do you want to leave your current job? Here’s one of those loaded questions. Best response is to indicate a logical career step “to” the new company. Avoid indicating any desire to get away “from” your current company. Stay positive.
3. What are your biggest strengths and weaknesses? Be prepared for this one. You’ve got to beat “hard-working” (strength) and ‘none” (weaknesses). When identifying a weakness, it’s important to include how you overcame it successfully.
4. How would your current or former colleagues describe you? Focus on what employees at different levels “look to you for”, i.e., a derivative of some of your strengths.
5. What is your goal for the short term? Before answering, clarify what “short term” means to the interviewer. Don’t get off on the wrong foot, since you have no way of knowing what the term means to the interviewer.
6. Are there certain tasks or types of people you don't like? Here’s a really loaded question, so be positive and honest. Keep in mind the tasks and folks who are likely to be involved with the job for which you are interviewing.
7. Do you have any questions? Not having any questions may suggest that you aren’t very bright or have much interest in the job. This is not the time to be asking about compensation, what the business is about, vacation or mandatory drug testing. Instead, ask a question or two showing your interest and knowledge about the company and job. The company’s web site is likely a good place to find information and for the basis for an intelligent question that shows you know something about the business.
Some prior thought to these, and other common-sense questions may be all that is needed to keep you from killing your interview chances.
To read the full article, please click here.
Want to know how your career can vanish before your eyes during an interview? The Wall Street Journal’s recent article “Seven Questions That Kill Careers” identifies these questions as ways to ensure you will have more free time (and less time at work):
1. So, tell me a little about yourself. This innocent-sounding question is a likely opening one. This is not where one describes one’s life history or most recent vacation frolic in Mexico. You may be best to simply make 1-2 brief comments about your most recent professional history.
2. Why do you want to leave your current job? Here’s one of those loaded questions. Best response is to indicate a logical career step “to” the new company. Avoid indicating any desire to get away “from” your current company. Stay positive.
3. What are your biggest strengths and weaknesses? Be prepared for this one. You’ve got to beat “hard-working” (strength) and ‘none” (weaknesses). When identifying a weakness, it’s important to include how you overcame it successfully.
4. How would your current or former colleagues describe you? Focus on what employees at different levels “look to you for”, i.e., a derivative of some of your strengths.
5. What is your goal for the short term? Before answering, clarify what “short term” means to the interviewer. Don’t get off on the wrong foot, since you have no way of knowing what the term means to the interviewer.
6. Are there certain tasks or types of people you don't like? Here’s a really loaded question, so be positive and honest. Keep in mind the tasks and folks who are likely to be involved with the job for which you are interviewing.
7. Do you have any questions? Not having any questions may suggest that you aren’t very bright or have much interest in the job. This is not the time to be asking about compensation, what the business is about, vacation or mandatory drug testing. Instead, ask a question or two showing your interest and knowledge about the company and job. The company’s web site is likely a good place to find information and for the basis for an intelligent question that shows you know something about the business.
Some prior thought to these, and other common-sense questions may be all that is needed to keep you from killing your interview chances.
To read the full article, please click here.
Thursday, August 4, 2011
The First Timeless Pillar of Leadership
by Peter Baker, Executive Director, Laser Institute of America
When you strip away all the fads of the last four decades and focus on what really works, there are Seven Timeless Pillars of Leadership. Here is the first one:
Know Thyself
The oracle at Delphi said it, and Sun Tzu, author of The Art of War, said “Know thyself, know thy enemy. A thousand battles, a thousand victories.”
You might well ask, “What does this mean for me? What shall I do about it?” What it means is that each of us has a unique set of aptitudes and attitudes, strengths and weaknesses. Some are bold and fearless like Alexander the Great—cut the Gordian Knot—rule the world! Some are more thoughtful and deliberate like Dwight Eisenhower—take time to plan the D-Day invasion, research moon and tide—then launch. There are many leadership styles and each can be effective, but you cannot copy someone else’s style. You must, as Shakespeare said, “to thine own self be true.” People can spot a fake in a heartbeat.
Most of us have a good idea of our key characteristics. If you are reading this you are probably pretty smart (hard to lead successfully if you are not) and have a basic idea of your type. I recommend digging in and facing the truth; be clear on your strengths and weaknesses. Use tools like the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® test or the DiSC® Personality test or other similar systems.
On two occasions I benefited by taking a whole battery of IQ tests, aptitude tests and tests to help show which kinds of careers would best fit me—and which would not. I found, no surprise, that I would be a poor fit as a Marine Corps Major! It was also recommended that I not try to fix my own car and to make sure I always have a good administrative assistant—good advice indeed. These tests and others like it are readily available online or through your local university career center. I recommend a career center which has the advantage of trained counselors to interpret and advise.
Once it is clear who the real you is, you can focus on using your strengths and building a team to support your weak areas. You can go through a similar process with key members of your team.
So there it is, the number one Pillar of Leadership—Know Thyself!
Peter Baker is the Executive Director of Laser Institute of America. He has studied and practiced the art of leadership since 1970.
When you strip away all the fads of the last four decades and focus on what really works, there are Seven Timeless Pillars of Leadership. Here is the first one:
Know Thyself
The oracle at Delphi said it, and Sun Tzu, author of The Art of War, said “Know thyself, know thy enemy. A thousand battles, a thousand victories.”
You might well ask, “What does this mean for me? What shall I do about it?” What it means is that each of us has a unique set of aptitudes and attitudes, strengths and weaknesses. Some are bold and fearless like Alexander the Great—cut the Gordian Knot—rule the world! Some are more thoughtful and deliberate like Dwight Eisenhower—take time to plan the D-Day invasion, research moon and tide—then launch. There are many leadership styles and each can be effective, but you cannot copy someone else’s style. You must, as Shakespeare said, “to thine own self be true.” People can spot a fake in a heartbeat.
Most of us have a good idea of our key characteristics. If you are reading this you are probably pretty smart (hard to lead successfully if you are not) and have a basic idea of your type. I recommend digging in and facing the truth; be clear on your strengths and weaknesses. Use tools like the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® test or the DiSC® Personality test or other similar systems.
On two occasions I benefited by taking a whole battery of IQ tests, aptitude tests and tests to help show which kinds of careers would best fit me—and which would not. I found, no surprise, that I would be a poor fit as a Marine Corps Major! It was also recommended that I not try to fix my own car and to make sure I always have a good administrative assistant—good advice indeed. These tests and others like it are readily available online or through your local university career center. I recommend a career center which has the advantage of trained counselors to interpret and advise.
Once it is clear who the real you is, you can focus on using your strengths and building a team to support your weak areas. You can go through a similar process with key members of your team.
So there it is, the number one Pillar of Leadership—Know Thyself!
Peter Baker is the Executive Director of Laser Institute of America. He has studied and practiced the art of leadership since 1970.
Monday, August 1, 2011
CEOs and Organizational Models
by Virgil R. Carter
As a CEO (or aspiring CEO), have you reached the conclusion that understanding your organizational model can help you reach more effective (and satisfying) leadership? The 2010 study of CEOs by Booz & Company, reported in Strategy+Business, sheds some light on the subject. I know, we’re in the non-profit sector, but we want to expand our awareness and learning as much as possible don’t we? How much applies to your situation?
This year’s findings identify four categories of organizations and management:
1. Holding: Distinguished by an arms-length approach to managing subsidiary activities. CEOs have a minimal degree of involvement in operational decisions. CEOs focus on “portfolio management”, while second-tier executives run daily business.
2. Strategic Management: CEOs and other senior executives are engaged in strategy development with subsidiary leaders, who have the accountability for business operations.
3. Active Management: CEOs and senior executives participate with close guidance and expertise, but leave direct operational management up to subsidiary units.
4. Operationally Involved: While execution remains within the subsidiary area, CEOs and senior executives play key roles in cross-unit capabilities, expertise, human resources and strategic decision making.
According to the Booz study, the organizational model clearly appears to influence CEO experience and tenure in the position. For example, the tenure in operationally involved organizations was markedly shorter and riskier. By comparison, the tenure of a CEO in a holding organization was a third longer than a CEO of an operationally involved organization. In addition, the study indicated that CEOs in operationally involved organizations are much more likely to depart during their first four years. For the full study, click here.
As a CEO (or aspiring CEO), have you reached the conclusion that understanding your organizational model can help you reach more effective (and satisfying) leadership? The 2010 study of CEOs by Booz & Company, reported in Strategy+Business, sheds some light on the subject. I know, we’re in the non-profit sector, but we want to expand our awareness and learning as much as possible don’t we? How much applies to your situation?
This year’s findings identify four categories of organizations and management:
1. Holding: Distinguished by an arms-length approach to managing subsidiary activities. CEOs have a minimal degree of involvement in operational decisions. CEOs focus on “portfolio management”, while second-tier executives run daily business.
2. Strategic Management: CEOs and other senior executives are engaged in strategy development with subsidiary leaders, who have the accountability for business operations.
3. Active Management: CEOs and senior executives participate with close guidance and expertise, but leave direct operational management up to subsidiary units.
4. Operationally Involved: While execution remains within the subsidiary area, CEOs and senior executives play key roles in cross-unit capabilities, expertise, human resources and strategic decision making.
According to the Booz study, the organizational model clearly appears to influence CEO experience and tenure in the position. For example, the tenure in operationally involved organizations was markedly shorter and riskier. By comparison, the tenure of a CEO in a holding organization was a third longer than a CEO of an operationally involved organization. In addition, the study indicated that CEOs in operationally involved organizations are much more likely to depart during their first four years. For the full study, click here.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Healthy Fervor
By Kevin McCray, Executive Director
National Ground Water Association
Westerville, OH
I recently posted to one of our association’s discussion boards a question asking what members thought are the top questions to be answered in our field. One answer certainly caught me off guard.
“This is part of the problem,” the respondent wrote, “when reputable groups attempt to accomplish a valuable service and end up creating a fervor.”
He went on to share comments about our field and continued with the need for responsibility in what we speak and what we write.
I don’t disagree with any of that. I certainly like it when we’re called a reputable group. But, I’m uncertain how my question leads to “fervor.” How do we hold civil discourse unless we openly talk or write about our thoughts and their implications?
Public Affairs Council President Doug Pinkham in his own blog of July 25, shares that America’s political gridlock might be a result changes in American community design and social interaction. He cites a National Affairs article by Marc Dunkelman who claims Americans are missing those talks with regular acquaintances, local business owners, fellow PTA members, or neighbors. Today, we’re all “honeycombed,” Dunkelman writes (Faith Popcorn called it “cocooning.” Robert Putnam named it “Bowling Alone.”)
Our missing relationships, according to Dunkelman, are needed to “ground the broad understanding that an integrated society will be more dynamic than one in which opposing interests perpetually snipe at one another…”
We have many ways in which we should create a little healthy fervor. One significant value of social media is for that one more opportunity to hold yet another conversation with yet another member – hopefully many members.
While we have to guard against applying too much grease to the latest squeaky wheel, these conversations are useful as we build our rapport and empathy with those we serve.
Stir the pot. Ask the hard questions. It’ll result in a better served customer, and a better served customer serves our associations well.
National Ground Water Association
Westerville, OH
I recently posted to one of our association’s discussion boards a question asking what members thought are the top questions to be answered in our field. One answer certainly caught me off guard.
“This is part of the problem,” the respondent wrote, “when reputable groups attempt to accomplish a valuable service and end up creating a fervor.”
He went on to share comments about our field and continued with the need for responsibility in what we speak and what we write.
I don’t disagree with any of that. I certainly like it when we’re called a reputable group. But, I’m uncertain how my question leads to “fervor.” How do we hold civil discourse unless we openly talk or write about our thoughts and their implications?
Public Affairs Council President Doug Pinkham in his own blog of July 25, shares that America’s political gridlock might be a result changes in American community design and social interaction. He cites a National Affairs article by Marc Dunkelman who claims Americans are missing those talks with regular acquaintances, local business owners, fellow PTA members, or neighbors. Today, we’re all “honeycombed,” Dunkelman writes (Faith Popcorn called it “cocooning.” Robert Putnam named it “Bowling Alone.”)
Our missing relationships, according to Dunkelman, are needed to “ground the broad understanding that an integrated society will be more dynamic than one in which opposing interests perpetually snipe at one another…”
We have many ways in which we should create a little healthy fervor. One significant value of social media is for that one more opportunity to hold yet another conversation with yet another member – hopefully many members.
While we have to guard against applying too much grease to the latest squeaky wheel, these conversations are useful as we build our rapport and empathy with those we serve.
Stir the pot. Ask the hard questions. It’ll result in a better served customer, and a better served customer serves our associations well.
Monday, July 18, 2011
CEOs and Creativity: A Good Match?
by Virgil R. Carter
Can creative thinking and activities be a positive characteristic for CEOs and senior executives? Your logic (not to mention your aspirations) may say yes. A recent article in Strategy+Business, cautions otherwise. “Is Creativity a Bad Trait for a Senior Leader” by Matt Palmquist cautions that “thinking outside the box could keep you out of the top management”. The article looks at how stereotypes about “creative types” and “effective leaders” often clash.
Many non-profit organizations historically tend to be organizations of habit, with predictable and consistent activities, year after year. “We’ve always done it this way” may often be the de facto organizational foundation. Typical leaders in such organizations are expected to have traits that reduce uncertainty and promote stability, “emphasizing shared goals and group identity to preserve the status quo”. Creative leaders, especially transformational leaders, have traits that “are at odds” with predictability and status quo. The very act of creativity, or transformation, is an act of “unproven solutions” that rock the boat with change.
Thus, if one is in the top CEO position, or aspires to be, creativity must be carefully nurtured and pursued, according to the article. Non-profits and volunteers who say they want fresh ideas and creative thinking may or may not actually support such efforts from their executive leadership. Interestingly, the article points to research that concludes that there is greater opportunity for creativity if the CEO and senior leaders involved show “stereotypically charismatic traits”, such as “uniqueness and individualism”. “A charismatic leader is expected to take the group in a new, novel direction”, according to Cornell University’s Jack Goncale. The S+B report concludes by noting that “…creative people who are also charismatic stand a better chance of advancing”.
For the full article, click here.
Can creative thinking and activities be a positive characteristic for CEOs and senior executives? Your logic (not to mention your aspirations) may say yes. A recent article in Strategy+Business, cautions otherwise. “Is Creativity a Bad Trait for a Senior Leader” by Matt Palmquist cautions that “thinking outside the box could keep you out of the top management”. The article looks at how stereotypes about “creative types” and “effective leaders” often clash.
Many non-profit organizations historically tend to be organizations of habit, with predictable and consistent activities, year after year. “We’ve always done it this way” may often be the de facto organizational foundation. Typical leaders in such organizations are expected to have traits that reduce uncertainty and promote stability, “emphasizing shared goals and group identity to preserve the status quo”. Creative leaders, especially transformational leaders, have traits that “are at odds” with predictability and status quo. The very act of creativity, or transformation, is an act of “unproven solutions” that rock the boat with change.
Thus, if one is in the top CEO position, or aspires to be, creativity must be carefully nurtured and pursued, according to the article. Non-profits and volunteers who say they want fresh ideas and creative thinking may or may not actually support such efforts from their executive leadership. Interestingly, the article points to research that concludes that there is greater opportunity for creativity if the CEO and senior leaders involved show “stereotypically charismatic traits”, such as “uniqueness and individualism”. “A charismatic leader is expected to take the group in a new, novel direction”, according to Cornell University’s Jack Goncale. The S+B report concludes by noting that “…creative people who are also charismatic stand a better chance of advancing”.
For the full article, click here.
Monday, July 11, 2011
Have You Considered An Executive Coach?
by Virgil A. Carter
How does a senior executive develop their volunteer leadership? Have you considered an executive coach? An article in the Summer 2011 Plexus newsletter Horizon, edited by Douglas Kleine, CAE, and titled “If Coaches Are Good for Executive Directors (and Basketball Teams), Why Not for Board Chairs?”, by Rick Moyers, makes the case for executive coaches, both for non-profit executive directors, and, wait for it…for board chairs! Yes, board chairs!
In for-profit corporations, and more frequently in non-profit organizations, executive coaches are recognized as valuable resources to develop and enhance important leadership capabilities. The ability of the experienced coach to tailor a one-to-one learning relationship is a powerful growth tool. It can be used to develop new strengths, as well as to address areas of needed improvement.
Mr. Moyers points out the opportunity for positive achievements with volunteer leaders by using a coach for the board chair. He points out that as volunteers, board chairs come to their role from a variety of experiences and backgrounds. Volunteers in non-profit organizations are frequently subject-matter experts in their field of endeavor. Seldom, however, are the volunteers experienced in top corporate executive leadership. And few volunteers have a well-balanced understanding of the overall non-profit organization that they lead.
Of course, it’s difficult or impossible for the executive director to act as a “coach” for the board chair. In most cases the executive director reports directly to the board chair, making positive “learning opportunities” few and far between, at best. Thus, making executive coaching an annual, budgeted resource for the board chair provides a most important resource for the chair, for the executive director and for the organization. The chair and the coach can work out their own annual program each year, giving the chair an invaluable developmental resource and communications channel.
The author notes that if coaching can produce successful athletic teams, it can also produce successful volunteer (and staff) leaders. For the full article, click here.
How does a senior executive develop their volunteer leadership? Have you considered an executive coach? An article in the Summer 2011 Plexus newsletter Horizon, edited by Douglas Kleine, CAE, and titled “If Coaches Are Good for Executive Directors (and Basketball Teams), Why Not for Board Chairs?”, by Rick Moyers, makes the case for executive coaches, both for non-profit executive directors, and, wait for it…for board chairs! Yes, board chairs!
In for-profit corporations, and more frequently in non-profit organizations, executive coaches are recognized as valuable resources to develop and enhance important leadership capabilities. The ability of the experienced coach to tailor a one-to-one learning relationship is a powerful growth tool. It can be used to develop new strengths, as well as to address areas of needed improvement.
Mr. Moyers points out the opportunity for positive achievements with volunteer leaders by using a coach for the board chair. He points out that as volunteers, board chairs come to their role from a variety of experiences and backgrounds. Volunteers in non-profit organizations are frequently subject-matter experts in their field of endeavor. Seldom, however, are the volunteers experienced in top corporate executive leadership. And few volunteers have a well-balanced understanding of the overall non-profit organization that they lead.
Of course, it’s difficult or impossible for the executive director to act as a “coach” for the board chair. In most cases the executive director reports directly to the board chair, making positive “learning opportunities” few and far between, at best. Thus, making executive coaching an annual, budgeted resource for the board chair provides a most important resource for the chair, for the executive director and for the organization. The chair and the coach can work out their own annual program each year, giving the chair an invaluable developmental resource and communications channel.
The author notes that if coaching can produce successful athletic teams, it can also produce successful volunteer (and staff) leaders. For the full article, click here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
