Plexus Consulting Group®

How Hard Times Affect a CEO’s Career and Management Style

2012-01-30T11:55:00.000-05:00

Virgil Carter

Interested in becoming a CEO?

Authors Antoinette Schoar and Luo Zuo, from the MIT Sloan School of Management, write about the impact of challenging economic times on CEO career paths and management styles. Published in a recent S+B newsletter, the authors write that “the economic conditions at the beginning of a manager’s career…have lasting effects on the career path and the ultimate outcome as a CEO”.

Starting a career in a recession “also affects a CEO’s approach to management”, the researchers say. Such CEOs tend to “run thins in a more conservative way, investing less in capital expenditures and in research and development, for example”. Those who begin in harder times, and thus can be seen as more recession-minded, reach the top more quickly, and are more likely to rise through the ranks at a single firm than to move across companies and industries.

The researchers also note their findings that these same CEOs “tend to lead smaller firms and receive lower compensation than their peers who started during brighter economic times”. The findings point to the uncomfortable reality that the careers of recession-minded CEOs are not as successful as CEOs who begin in boom times.

The challenges between leading a company during extended periods of pronounced growth and turning around a distressed company may be quite different. Yet, according to the researchers, “recession-minded CEOs do not perform differently during down times or booms”, the authors argue that their managerial styles, once formed, are relatively fixed over time. For the full article, go here: http://www.strategy-business.com/article/re00171?pg=all

This may be a great time to become a CEO!

Seven Habits of Spectacularly Unsuccessful Executives

2012-01-23T11:13:00.003-05:00

Virgil Carter

Forbes Magazine recently published an article by Sidney Finkelstein, the Roth Professor of Management at the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth College. The article, “Why Smart Executives Fail” summarized some of his research on why over 50 former successful industries, including Enron, Tyco and Schwinn, had become complete failures. It turns out the senior executives at the companies all had seven habits in common. Here are the habits:

Executives see themselves and their companies as dominating their environment: Finkelstein notes this first habit may be the most insidious, since it appears to be highly desirable. The challenge is that failed leaders with this habit fail to realize they are at the mercy of changing circumstances. They vastly overestimate their ability to control events and underestimate the role of chance and circumstance in their success.

There is no clear boundary between executive’s personal interests and their corporation’s interests: Like the first habit, this seems innocuous, even beneficial. The issue is that these executive often use their companies to carry out personal ambitions. The most slippery slope of all for these executives in their tendency to use corporate funds for personal reasons.

They think they have all the answers: The image of executive competence we have been taught to admire is one of a dynamic leader making dozens of decisions a minute. The problem is that leaders who are invariably crisp and decisive tend to settle issues too quickly with no grasp of the ramifications. Worse, these leaders feel they have all the answers, so they aren’t open to learning any new ones.

Elimination of anyone not completely behind the executives: Many CEOs think their job is to instill belief in their vision and to get everyone to buy into the vision. It’s get with the plan or leave. By eliminating all dissenting and contrasting points of view, destructive CEOs cut themselves off from their best chance to seeing and correcting problems as they arise.

They are consummate spokespersons, obsessed with the company image: The challenge is that amid all the media frenzy and accolades, these leaders’ management efforts may become shallow and ineffective. Instead of actually accomplishing things, they often settle for the appearance of accomplishing things. When CEOs are obsessed with their image, they have little time for operational details.

They underestimate obstacles: When CEOs becomes so enamored of their vision, they often overlook or underestimate the difficulty of actually getting there. Some CEOs feel an enormous need to be right in every important decision they make, because if they admit to being fallible, their position as CEO might seem precarious.

They stubbornly rely on what worked for them in the past: Many CEOs on their way to becoming spectacularly unsuccessful accelerate their company’s decline by reverting to their own careers and do the things that made them successful in the past—no matter how unrealistic or inapplicable it may be.

Bottom line: If you have several of these traits, now is the time to eliminate them from your repertoire. If your boss or several senior executives at your company exhibit several of these traits, now may be the time to polish your resume and find a new job!

Making the Most of Uncertainty

2012-01-20T09:08:00.000-05:00

Virgil R. Carter

Organizational leaders are faced with how best to lead their organizations during times of uncertainty. For example, is it better for a non-profit organization to energetically research and invest in the outcome of crucial and currently uncertain elements of the organization’s operations and industry or discipline? Or is the wiser course to adopt defensible positions within the organization’s existing structure and then to move to recognize and capture new opportunities when the economy changes?

A recently republished article by Hugh Courtney, published by the McKinsey Quarterly, “Making the Most of Uncertainty” addresses this issue.

“As globalization, digitization, and unfettered capital markets raise levels of uncertainty and rewrite definitions of opportunities and risks, this basic strategic choice has morphed into a more complex and high-stakes dilemma”, according to the article. “The right strategic bets can return far higher payoffs, far more quickly; the wrong ones carry a much higher risk of systemic failure. Betting big today may fundamentally reshape a market on a global scale to the advantage of a company or quickly produce losses that can throw it into bankruptcy. A company may avoid foolhardy mistakes by waiting for uncertainty to diminish, or it may squander the chance to lay claim to first-mover advantages.” The parallels for non-profit organizations are obvious.

“The truth is that no dominant solution exists”, is the reassuring conclusion!

Pursuing the question of how to address uncertainty, the author states, “An essential starting point is understanding your alternatives. Shaping and adapting strategies may take many different forms. Shapers generally attempt to get ahead of uncertainty by driving industry change their way. Adapters, by contrast, take the existing and future industry structure and conduct as given. When a market is stable, adapters try to define defensible positions within the industry’s existing structure. When high uncertainty prevails, they attempt to win through speed and agility in recognizing and capturing new opportunities as the market changes.”

“Whether a company should attempt to shape or adapt depends largely on the level and nature of the uncertainty it faces. To put things simply, when it faces very high levels of uncertainty about variables it can influence, shaping makes most sense. Adapting is preferable when key sources of value creation are relatively stable or outside the company’s control.”

As executives make shape-or-adapt choices, uncertainty, perceived first-mover advantages, and the organization’s capabilities and aspirations play important roles. No algorithm exists to weigh each factor, nor can a one-size-fits-all answer suit all organizations in all situations. One thing, however, is certain: executives “who develop a thorough understanding of the level and nature of the residual uncertainty their organization faces can develop a richer set of feasible alternatives and make better-informed choices to shape or adapt.”

For a full copy of the article, go here: https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Strategy/Strategic_Thinking/Making_the_most_of_uncertainty_1128

Five New Management Metrics You Need To Know

2012-01-13T11:58:00.001-05:00

In a Forbes Magazine article, author James Slavet of Greylock Partners writes that he has watched some of the best startup CEOs in the world and found that “the most important metrics are often ones you never read about on the income statement or in the financial press”. Here’s five metrics that great CEOs and management teams practice:

Flow State Percentage: Jobs that require a lot of brainpower—software programming for instance—also demand deep concentration. “Flow state” is a term coined by psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, meaning “you’re in the zone” when working on something; you’re cranking! Unfortunately, most of us are constantly interrupted during the day with meetings, emails, tests, or colleagues who want to talk. These interruptions that move us out of “flow state” increase the time to be productive and increase costs dramatically. To get more “flow state”, brainstorm ways that you and your team can reduce interruptions and increase your flow!

The Anxiety-Boredom Continuum: This continuum, when applied to managing people, means striving to achieve the work rhythm fast enough so that people are challenged, but not so difficult that people can’t cope. If people have low energy, or are showing up late and leaving early, they may be bored. If they’re responding to small setback with anger or frustration, or setting sick a lot, they may be pushing too hard.

Meeting Promoter Score: Meetings are a pain—and they’re expensive. In the last minute of a meeting, ask your team to rate how effective their meeting was, with one suggestion for making the meeting better.

Compound Weekly Learning Rate: The ability to learn is like the compounding interest on an investment: after two or three years, a relentless learner stands head and shoulders above his/her peers. Try asking your management team: how did you get 1% better this week? Did you learn something valuable from our customers, or make a change to our product that drove better results? 1% per week adds up.

Positive Feedback Ratio: John Gottman, a psychologist and author of “Why Marriages Succeed or Fail”, found in his research that marriages that succeed tend to have five times as many positive interactions as negative marriages. When a couple falls below that ratio, their relationship suffers. The same is true at the office, where you are often connected for years in relationships with people who can either become wary of your criticisms or eager to give you their best effort. Never miss a chance to say something constructive. Then when feedback on improvements is needed, chances are your team will listen.

Will these metrics work for you and your team?

The Importance of Growth and Celebration

2012-01-12T11:02:00.000-05:00

By Mark Rubin, Executive Director

Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)

My organization, the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE), reached an important milestone this past November by reaching 100,000 members. The final membership figure for 2012 was 104,762, including 75,395 professionals and 29,367 students. While the growth in overall membership is important, we are especially proud of growing our professional membership by an average of 4.7% each year for the past decade.

Reaching this milestone provided an opportunity to think about what had driven our growth. Part of the reason was the relatively good health of the industry that we serve and the critical need for technology to find and produce oil and natural gas. The petroleum industry is vital to the world economy, with oil and natural gas providing 54% of the energy used globally. While this positive industry climate provided the opportunity, there were a number of things that we did to take advantage of this opportunity. Our staff leadership team identified several key factors for our growth over the past decade:

· Emphasis on globalization. Our international expansion, begun in the 1970s, continued over the past decade by establishing new offices in Dubai, Calgary and Moscow, in addition to our existing offices in the Dallas, Houston, London and Kuala Lumpur. These offices have given us global reach, and have allowed us to expand and adapt our programs and services around the world.

· Creativity and flexibility in meeting the needs of members. We have recognized that a one-size-fits-all approach does not work for a global organization. This has lead to a number of changes including improvements in our dues collection system, emphasis on young professionals programs, and emphasis on addressing the needs of geographic and technical niche groups within our membership.

· Devotion to quality and integrity in all of our products and services. Maintaining our reputation for quality has had a significant impact on membership growth and participation in all of our programs.

· Expansion of our global meetings program. We conduct more than three times as many meetings each year compared to a decade ago. Our meetings meet member needs and enhance our reputation in our industry, helping us attract new members.

· Investments in technology. The internet has provided opportunities to enable members to access SPE resources from anywhere around the world quickly and easily. We have made significant investments to expand the online resources offered.

· Enhancing support for local Sections and Student Chapters. Local participation is the most valued part of membership for a large share of our members. We have made significant investments in supporting these groups and have seen significant growth in the number of both Sections and Student Chapters globally.

· Fostering a progressive staff culture. We strive to foster a staff culture of people who care - who like and want to help our members, and who take pride in what they do. We continue to make significant investments in training and supporting our growing staff organization.

We have used achievement of the 100,000 member milestone as an opportunity to celebrate our success. I am especially pleased that while we have achieved much as an organization, there are still many more opportunities for future growth for our organization.

Think PYRAMID When Fundraising

2012-01-12T10:10:00.000-05:00

Todd Wurschmidt, PhD, CAE, CFRE

Senior Advisor, Plexus Consulting Group, LLC

Washington, DC

Just recently I heard (once again), “All we need to do is get our 100,000 Members to each give $1.00.” Ah, if fundraising were only that simple! It’s NOT.

If you take away one message from this Plexus Blog it would be:

“Forget equal-share-giving; Think PYRAMID.”

Do you recall who Vilfredo Pareto was? Ever heard of the 80-20 Rule? The 80-20 Rule was derived from the work and writings of Vilfredo Pareto, an Italian man of many trades – engineer; sociologist; political scientist; economist; and philosopher. Pareto observed that 80% of the land in Italy (circa early 1900s) was owned by 20% of the population. Similarly:

- 80% of effects are largely derived from 20% of causes

- 80% of sales come largely from 20% of one’s clients

- 80% of sales are derived from the efforts of 20% of one’s sales staff

- 80% of the space in a company’s warehouse is taken up by 20% of the inventory’s products

- 80% of problems one encounters are largely derived from 20% of the range of defects identified

We could go on……. You get the sense. And, yes, reality may sometimes have the percentage splits as 70-30 or 83-17 or whatever. Pareto’s Principle still holds merit. And, we could use Pareto’s mathematical formula to calculate these relationships, but that is less important for our purposes than applying this important “Pareto Principle” to your Association’s fundraising efforts…..large or small.

It is probably the most frequent and instinctive solution for someone on our Board, Committee, or Task Force to assert, “If we just get everyone to give $1.00 (or $5.00 or $100.00 each), we will meet our goal.” I can only assume this flawed assertion comes from that fact that it is easy to conceive of this approach as “a strategy driving toward a solution.” Equally, it’s easy to do the necessary math (#’s times $’s = Total $ Goal). But, resist you must. It doesn’t work. Think PYRAMID.

In fundraising, 20% of your Donors give 80% of your Campaign Goal….. There it is, that pesky, insightful “Pareto Principle – The 80-20 Rule.” And, thankfully, these top 20% of Donors have the capacity and wherewithal to give MORE per donation (i.e., larger gift amounts). Thus, early-on in our planning process, we need to devise Gift Categories. But first:

Spend your initial energies Identifying and Clarifying your Need(s).

Your first step does NOT involve money. Your first step involves identifying and clarifying your Need(s). Why are you thinking about raising money? What do you want to accomplish? Your Program and/or Service Objectives are paramount to framing the foundation from which you will springboard to achieving fundraising success. If you don’t have a “Good to Great” cause, you aren’t likely to be successful.

1^st) Identify and Clarify your Association’s Need(s)

2^nd) Calculate the Total Amount of Money you need to raise

3^rd) Derive some four or five Gift Categories that are based on your Total Fundraising Campaign Goal, and based upon your Donors’ ability and interest to give

4^th) Construct a Gift Pyramid Chart w/ your Gift Categories set alongside the Number of Gifts/Donations you will need per each Gift Category in order to achieve your Fundraising Goals.

Below is a sample PYRAMID Gift Chart. This sample PYRAMID Gift Chart has a variety of instructional pieces of information. Please note:

1) Five Gift Ranges listed in the First Column on the left-hand side

2) The color PYRAMID w/ the Number of Gifts needed for each of the five Gift Ranges

3) Third column which combines the first two columns to calculate the Sub-Goals and thus, the Total Campaign Goal

4) Columns Four to Eight presents five years of historical data for this sample Fundraising Campaign for comparative analysis

5) The box on the bottom gives insight into the number of Campaign Volunteers needed

Lastly, you MUST identify PROSPECTIVE DONORS that you believe your research shows might be able to donate at one of the five Gift Categories. For this sample Campaign and this PYRAMID Gift Chart, we show our need to solicit 80 Total Gifts. In order to successfully solicit 80 Gifts, we would need to make perhaps 200 to 500 “ASKS” (depending on this being our first Campaign or our having a collection of past (and hopefully Repeat) Donors.

As you can easily see, this is not “Equal-Share-Giving.” This involves constructing a Pyramidal Gift Chart w/ multiple levels of Gift Giving. This requires our spending more time Planning and then Implementing, but the planning time will be well worth your efforts.

How Hard Times Affect a CEO’s Career and Management Style

2012-01-10T11:54:00.000-05:00

By Virgil Carter

Interested in becoming a CEO?

This may be a great time to become a CEO!

Three Processes to Align Mission & Money

2012-01-10T09:30:00.000-05:00

By Virgil R. Carter

Beginning a new calendar year often means a new fiscal year for non-profit organizations. Whenever a new fiscal year is imminent means a new annual budget cycle. Does your organization have an annual process to align mission and money? Is your annual budgeting cycle tied to your mission? Can one look at your annual budget and see clear priorities for accomplishing the organizational mission for the budget year? To link mission and money there are at least three interconnected processes that may be helpful. Here’s a brief look at each.

1. Innovation: An annual budgeted innovation program, with staff and budget, is a good approach for encouraging and rewarding ideas for new programs, products and services that support the organization’s mission and are based on emerging customer needs. One approach is to organize the process as an on-going annual grants program, where written proposals are reviewed and approved, if deemed worthy. Caution: care must be taken to carefully spell out innovation program objectives so that it’s clear the program is for new ideas, and not to perpetuate the status quo. Review of proposals must also be carefully based on the innovation program objectives, so as not to simply fund continuation of existing activities.

2. Existing Program Annual Review: Most non-profit organizations allocate all of their available resources (financial and human) in support of annual operations. Thus, without the reduction and/or “sunset” of some annual programs, products and services, there may be no capability to add new activities through innovation or any other means. One approach for annual program review is to implement a customer satisfaction review process, using the “voice of the customer” as a basis for gathering and evaluating data as to which programs, products and services are valued by your customers. Goods and services not highly valued by customers each year are prime candidates for reduction and /or replacement.

3. Annual Program Planning/Budgeting: Finally, with information from the previous two activities, an organization may conduct a rational annual process for the planning and budgeting of activities for the following 1, 2 or 3 year periods. Instead of the annual budgeting cycle leading the process, it logically is the final phase of review and planning for the future. This also helps to reduce status-quo program competition by incumbents for a larger and larger share of the financial pie every year.

Aligning mission and money is important for a number of reasons. Here are two:

Non-profit organizations need to keep pace with their critical changing markets;
In most cases, there are never enough resources for everything, and thus some priorities have to be established.

Thus the old adage is true for many non-profits, “If something new is to be added to the wagon, then something old must be removed.” Are your mission and money aligned?

Organizational Strength through Diversification

2011-12-29T14:51:00.003-05:00

by Virgil Carter

This is the time of year when many of us look back at the past year to see what we can learn and apply to the new year’s challenges. This may be the time for CEOs, staff and volunteer leaders to do a quick check on the strength of their organizations. 2012 is likely to be as challenging a year as past years. Is your organization economically strong? Do you have the protection and advantage of economic diversification? Or all of your eggs in one large basket?

A recent Strategy+Business article, “A Continuous Quest for Economic Balance”, by Richard Shediac, Chadi N. Moujaes and Mazen Ramsay Najjar, focuses on the important economic diversification of countries. Much of what they write has equal application to the strength and well-being of many of our non-profit organizations.

For example, the authors write “Countries can be over-concentrated in any number of ways—for example, relying too heavily on large companies, exports, or foreign investment—and even countries that appear extremely diversified may still be vulnerable to unexpected events.” How applicable is this to your organization?

A quick check of your annual budget will reveal the sources of your revenues. If your major source of revenue accounts for more than about 35% of total revenues, you may question whether or not there is sufficient diversification (and protection) for your organization’s well-being. If a single source of revenue counts for the majority of your revenue flow (over 50%) your organization may be at severe risk in the event of some disruption to the source of revenue. Risk may be reduced and economic strength will be gained through economic diversification.

How to achieve strength through improved economic balance? Certainly, continuing to support the elements that are at the center of an organization’s financial strength is obvious. The answer for successful diversification is not simple. And it is not achieved in a single step. Diversification is a continuous, never-ending journey. Perhaps the most successful journey is one that looks to increase the return of other key existing revenue sources, while also looking for new opportunities that are consistent with the mission of the organization. Innovation and entrepreneurial efforts are a key in this regard.

For many non-profit organizations, economic strength through diversification is not easy. No organization can be successful, however, without economic strength. And if a conscious effort for needed diversification isn’t made, economic strength may never be achieved. Is your economic balance where you’d like it to be?

For the full Strategy+Business article: http://www.strategy-business.com/article/00064?pg=0

Three Processes to Align Mission & Money

2011-12-27T09:39:00.001-05:00

By Virgil R. Carter

Beginning a new calendar year often means a new fiscal year for non-profit organizations. Whenever a new fiscal year is imminent means a new annual budget cycle. Does your organization have an annual process to align mission and money? Is your annual budgeting cycle tied to your mission? Can one look at your annual budget and see clear priorities for accomplishing the organizational mission for the budget year? To link mission and money there are at least three interconnected processes that may be helpful. Here’s a brief look at each.

Aligning mission and money is important for a number of reasons. Here are two:

Non-profit organizations need to keep pace with their critical changing markets;
In most cases, there are never enough resources for everything, and thus some priorities have to be established.

Thus the old adage is true for many non-profits, “If something new is to be added to the wagon, then something old must be removed.” Are your mission and money aligned?

Compete or……..?

2011-12-22T08:46:00.002-05:00

by Steven Worth

As a rule whenever anyone faces competition there are four healthy ways in which to react: 1) we can choose to compete heard-on, if we feel we have a competitive advantage; 2) we can abandon the field to the competitor and choose a less crowded and more profitable area in which to compete; 3) we can find ways to co-exist with the new competition through partnership or some other form of accommodation; or 4) we can retrench and redefine the way in which we are going to compete.

Each one of these four options are different and worthy of book-length discussions of strategies in their own right—depending on the field and the nature of the competition; but they all share a common attitude—a realistic look at the competition and a desire to find a winning strategy.

When one looks at the growth rates of the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) in a wide variety of fields, it is possible to forecast when each will surpass the US—provided all current conditions remain the same. This last phrase is key, and therein lies the future for US-based organizations.

The four options outlined above are not the only options we have of course. Here are four more options that some find appealing: 1) keep doing what we have been doing and ignore the competition; 2) resort to brute force (such as the threat of litigation or government-imposed trade barriers for example) to frighten the competition away; 3) keep focused on positive thoughts until they become reality; or 4) accept the inevitability of being something less than number one. These options too share something in common—they all ultimately lead to failure.

How to Define Success?

2011-12-19T08:43:00.003-05:00

By Virgil Carter

The beginning of each year is often a time of analysis and planning for many non-profit organizations. It’s often a time for analyzing past performance and planning for next year’s activities. Has the past year been successful? Are you planning to improve your organizational success in the coming year? These questions raise the issue of how your association defines success. Success comes in many flavors. Perhaps the important thing is to identify and implement what works for your organization. Thereafter communicate, communicate, and communicate.

So, what does your association value most? Is it performance? How about relationships? Perhaps its competencies or credentialing. Each organization is different when it comes to what matters most, not to mention why it matters to us. So, to define success, there has to be agreement on what matters most. The situation, which may change over time, has a lot to do with defining success. For example, an association in a protracted, downward financial spiral may define success very differently than an association whose growth has been 30% per year for the past five years.

Here are some important success categories, with suggestions how they might be used.

Strategy--Does our association have a sustained record of performance to plan over time (successful strategy is not measured in 12-month cycles and someone’s pet agenda for the year)?
Voice of the customer—Who are our (right) customers and how do you know if they are satisfied (yes, there may be “wrong” customers)?
Financial—Do we have sustained performance over time meeting budget or ending each year with positive variances (no margin, no mission)?
Business operations—What is the record of new program development and existing program retirement over the past 5 years (are you still doing what you did 5 years ago)?
Learning & growth—What investment do we make on a consistent annual basis for volunteer’s & staff’s learning and growth in their association roles (no investment, no dividends)?

When you have figured out what matters most to your association and how you will measure success, it’s time to think about annual communications planning and the year’s key audiences and messages. Key messages are important for association leaders—volunteers and staff—to focus on, repeat and reinforce. The messages help everyone to understand and stay on the same page.

There are many useful ways to define organizational success. And to communicate effectively about it. When there is consensus about success, your volunteers, staff and external relationships will thank you, knowing what to expect and how to help. How will you measure organizational success in 2012?

Globalization’s Influence on the Rise of Nationalism

2011-12-14T10:20:00.001-05:00

By Steven Worth

President, Plexus Consulting Group

It is counterintuitive that the more globalization takes root, the more nationalism asserts itself.

But it is a fact that there are more nations in existence in the world today than ever in the history of our planet. The number stands at approximately 196 countries and counting. South Sudan was the most recent nation to be added to the list, with more sure to come. For those grappling to understand the forces exerted by globalization this seemingly contradictory trend is key to understanding a critical facet of globalization’s impact on our economy and society—that it allows us to celebrate our differences as well as those things that link us together as human beings.

The underlying reason for this growth of nationalism in this era of globalization is twofold.

First, the circumstances that have made possible the largely peaceful co-existence of the planet’s nations since the Second World War have also made it safe for long suppressed nationalities to assert themselves. If nations are a form of extended family, then it is natural for them to take pride in their identities at a time when they no longer need to be subservient to a foreign power.

Second, as individuals we instinctively resist conformity. Yes, we want to benefit from access to the wealth and technology and goods and services from anywhere in the world that strikes our fancy, but we don’t want to lose our identities in the process. Globalization is not the Faustian bargain that it is often portrayed to be.

So what does this mean for managers of organizations that aspire to be global? It means that nations are here to stay and that you ignore them at your own risk. It means that you need to think long and hard about tailoring products to meet local needs and customs. Having free access to sell to the global market does not mean one size fits all.

What Can Be Done to Restart Growth

2011-12-12T09:12:00.003-05:00

by Virgil R. Carter

In today’s “go-slow” economy, confronted with uncertainty, it takes vision and innovation to create growth. “Growth Under Pressure: What Business Can Do To Restart Growth”, is an article by Richard Dobbs, James Manyika and Charles Roxburg, published by McKinsey and Company. Although aimed at the for-profit private sector and public sector, leaders in non-profit organizations may learn from the author’s proposals. They identify five primary areas of opportunity for new growth in today’s economy:

· Bring private capital to public works: In many developed economies, degraded infrastructure now drags down the global economy’s long-term growth and competitiveness. The American Society of Civil Engineers, for example, estimates in the United States $2.2 trillion is needed to be spent over the next five years to bring its existing infrastructure up to what ASCE calls a good condition. Since government doesn’t have the money, a creative alternative is to create a new round of privatization and creation of jobs. Private companies and consortia could take over the operation of new facilities and provide the investment to upgrade old ones.

· Strengthen Internet ecosystems: In a study by MGI, in mature economies over the past 15 years, the Internet has accounted for 10 percent of DGP growth, which accelerated to 21 percent in the past five years. An expansion of broadband access and performance is needed to cope with rising demand and innovation. To encourage this, “policy makers must ensure the Internet’s openness and competitiveness, invest to develop and retain the human capital needed to drive Internet innovation, and ensure availability of capital so that fledgling innovative businesses can grow. If conditions are right, private-sector innovation and jobs will follow”.

· Meet the resource-productivity imperative: The steady decline in real resource prices enjoyed throughout the 20^th century has now reversed course. Three billion new middle-class consumers into the global economy has boosted demand for key resources and increased the risk of price spikes that could curtail global growth. Expanding resource supply alone will not suffice to meet this new demand. Resource productivity—increasing output for every unit of resource input—is also required. Increased investment in resource systems is required by both public and private sectors. “Green” investment is one such resource investment supporting the development of new jobs and industries.

· Close the skills gap: Many advanced economies are grappling with a severe mismatch between the skills developed by their education and training systems and those required in sectors where job growth will be strongest. On current trends, the U.S. will produce twice as many graduates in the social sciences and business as in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. It’s estimated that the country may face a shortfall of almost two million technical and analytical workers. These needs may be filled by a combination of young and older workers, “with removed barriers preventing older workers from staying in the workforce longer”. “Ultimately, the only reliable way to encourage students to develop skills in these growth areas is for companies to make these careers more attractive and market them better in schools and university campuses”.

· Build public-private partnerships: Governments need their own productivity revolution. According to the authors, “to reap these and other rewards, however, cash-strapped governments—and their citizens—will need to be more open-minded about private involvement in the delivery of public services”. “The case for public-private cooperation may be easiest to make at the city level, where most future global growth will occur”. “A majority of successful cities are already notable for a high degree of collaboration between the private and public sectors”.

The authors conclude, saying, “With a few notable exceptions, business leader have been slow to raise these issues…It’s time for the private sector to take the lead in making the case for driving growth through innovation and investment.” For a full copy of the article, go here: http://www.mckinsey.com/en/Features/Growth.aspx

When Employees Talk and Managers Don’t Listen

2011-12-05T09:13:00.003-05:00

by Virgil R. Carter

According to a recent article published in the Journal of Business Ethics, and written by Gerdien de Vries, Karen A. Jehn and Bart W. Terwel, dangers lurk if suggestions from employees are sought but are considered.

Managers may operate in an autocratic (making unilateral choices) manner or a democratic (inviting employees to suggest improvements) way. Research has shown that motivation, job performance and morale increase when employees have the opportunity to contribute their concerns and ideas.

The authors write, however, that there’s “a consequence to giving employees a voice: a company has to listen.” If employees believe that a manager is simply paying lip service to consulting with employees, and has no desire to act on their advice, they are likely to stop offering input and, worse, “act out their frustration by clashing with colleagues.”

Conversely, according to the authors, employees, who thought their managers were paying attention to the employees suggestions and comments, “spoke up more often and got along better with one another, improving the organization’s functioning as a whole”.

The article’s conclusion? “Giving employees the opportunity to voice their opinions can be a positive force for change. But don’t put out a suggestion box if you aren’t willing to implement at least some of the suggestions”.

For a full copy of the article, go here: http://www.strategy-business.com/article/re00160?gko=82a49

Are you too busy doing to bother with where you are going?

2011-11-30T12:37:00.003-05:00

by Steven M. Worth

Some of us are more guilty of this than others. It is not that those who concentrate on the day-to-day are shallow or shortsighted necessarily--the case can certainly be made that if you “stick to your knitting” doing what you do well, that things tend to work out in the end. But it is also true that those who know where they are going tend to get there more often than not; and in the course of getting there, they tend to have a shaping influence on the world around them.

In the extreme, this natural dichotomy is also true of association managers who tend to fall into one of two camps. One is made up of those who focus solely on operational perfection; while the other consists of those who focus solely on a strategic vision. Both extremes can be frustrating to deal with—with the “doers” rarely questioning the relevance or effectiveness of what they are doing; while the “visionaries” more often than not are surrounded by a great deal of waste and drama. Ugh…what a choice!

Walter Isaacson’s recent biography of Steve Jobs is a study of a manager who exemplified the second management style. Politically, Jobs was very much attuned to President Obama; but how did Jobs evaluate the President as a manager? “Here’s the problem with Obama’s leadership: He doesn’t like to really piss people off,” Jobs said. “I guess that wasn’t a problem I ever had.”

One cannot read Isaacson’s biography of Jobs without feeling a certain ambivalence about the man. It is hard to come away from it feeling like Jobs would be a friend or good person to work for. But it is also hard to deny his shaping influence on how we have incorporated technology into our daily lives.

As in most extremes, the best place for most managers to be is somewhere in the middle. We need to be constantly questioning the relevance of what we are doing, and to do that we do need to know what it is we are trying to achieve long term. Member/customer satisfaction is not enough, because members/customers can and do change their minds in a flash if they see something more relevant to their needs somewhere else. But for the “visionaries” among us, we need also to recognize that efficiencies do matter—no one wants to be part of an organization that does not value its stakeholders’ time, talent or financial resources.

Efficiency and effectiveness are what senior management is all about, and periodically it is useful to look at the two extremes to make sure we are where we should be.

Leadership: Training or Development?

2011-11-28T14:23:00.005-05:00

by Virgil R. Carter

As a CEO, do you have a group of senior leaders in your organization that you’d like to help grow into your organization’s next generation of executive? What about supporting your senior staff to become mature executive? If so, what do you do? Well, of course, you put them through some training, right? Wrong!

In a recent article, “Training vs. Development, by Mike Myatt, Chief Strategy Officer, N2growth, you don’t train leaders you develop them. According to Myatt, “Leadership training is alive and well, but it should have died long, long ago…”

Myatt says that the problem with training is it presumes the need for indoctrination on systems, processes and techniques. Moreover, training assumes that these systems, processes and techniques are the right way to do things. The dilemma, describes Myatt, is that training is “often a rote, one directional, one dimensional, one size fits all, authoritarian process”, imposing static, outdated information on people”.

The solution to the leadership problem, he says, is to scrap it in favor of development. “Don’t train leaders, coach them, mentor them…and develop them, but please don’t attempt to train them”. Development strives to focus on the unique and differentiate by shattering the status quo. Myatt has a list pointing out some of the differences between training and development, including:

· Training focuses on the present—Development focuses on the future

· Training focuses on technique—Development focuses on talent

· Training focuses on maintenance—Development focuses on growth

· Training focuses on the role—Development focuses on the person

· Training focuses on efficiency—Development focuses on effectiveness

Myatt concludes saying, “If what you desire is a robotic, static thinker—train them. If you’re seeking innovative, critical thinkers—develop them”.

For a copy of the full article, go here: http://www.n2growth.com/blog/training-isnt-dead-but-it-should-be/

Can Volunteering Help Us Weather Tough Economic Times

2011-11-22T12:31:00.004-05:00

by Virgil R. Carter

Is there a connection between volunteering and economic resilience? A report recently released by the National Conference on Citizenship (NCoC) concludes that “states with higher levels of civic engagement are more resilient in an economic downturn.” The report identifies five measures of civic engagement which appear to protect against unemployment and contribute to overall economic resilience:

· Attending meetings

· Helping neighbors

· Registering to vote

· Volunteering

· Voting

The report calls on community and business leaders to use these findings to inform a public discussion of how civic health can help improve the economy. Would these measures help improve the health and well-being of your non-profit organization?

“Of these five civic health indicators, working with neighbors was the most important factor in predicting economic resilience, as an increase of one percent in neighbors working together to solve community problems was associated with a decrease of .256 percent in the unemployment rate. Public meeting attendance emerged as the second most important factor, followed by volunteering and registering to vote as top important predictors of unemployment change.”

“As the national debate turns to jobs and restoring civility, our leaders need to understand that one answer for our political and economic woes begins with restoring America’s tradition of service and civic engagement,” said John Bridgeland, Former Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council and Current National Advisory Chair, NCoC. “It not only gives communities a boost, it may also lessen the effects of the economic downturn.”

For a full copy of the article, go here: http://www.ncoc.net/unemployment-release

Some Lessons from the 1930s

2011-11-14T09:27:00.000-05:00

by Virgil Carter

Is there anyone who hasn’t become aware of the turmoil and uncertainty in global financial markets, and the impact on the economy and consumer confidence? These conditions have generated a great deal of interest in the U.S. Great Depression in the 1930s.

Can we learn useful lessons from the 1930s? In an article in the McKinsey Quarterly, author Tom Nicholas writes that, if history is our guide, even the “deepest downturns can create huge opportunities for organizations with money and ideas”. Nicholas goes on to say, “For investments to promote innovation, the answer may be yes”.

Is the typical behavior of executives—act cautiously and delay investment projects until confidence returns—the wise course? According to Nichols, many companies hesitated to innovate during the 1930s. On the whole, corporate executives considering plans for research investments preferred to wait and see. “From 1929 to 1937, for example, there were five years of GDP growth and four years of GDP contraction. Patent applications generally followed the same pattern, lagging behind by one year: the number of patent applications increased during years following GDP growth and decreased during years following GDP contraction, with two exceptions: 1934 and 1935”, Nichols describes.

“Yet several successful companies did not delay such investments. One was DuPont. In April 1930, a noted DuPont research scientist, Wallace Carothers, recorded the initial discovery of neoprene (synthetic rubber). Although the company’s price levels and sales fell by roughly 10 and 15 percent, respectively, that year, DuPont boosted R&D spending to develop the new technology commercially. Neoprene, which DuPont publicly announced in November 1931 and introduced commercially in 1937, became one of the 20th century’s major innovations.”

Nichols goes on to say, “DuPont isn’t the only such example. Many new technology companies—for instance, Hewlett-Packard and Polaroid—that became leading innovators later in the century were established as entrepreneurial start-ups during the 1930s”.

“Of course, these examples don’t mean that aggressive investments for innovation would have been wise for every company during the 1930s or are universally wise today. But taken together, the patent research and the experience of successful innovators in those years suggest that although delay is the natural response to uncertainty, some companies should continue innovating even in an extraordinarily deep economic downturn—especially with technologies that take a long time to commercialize after discovery”, Nichols concludes. “Companies that delay these investments may forego significant growth opportunities when uncertainty subsides and the economy recovers. For companies with cash and ideas, history shows that downturns can provide enormous strategic opportunities.”

Sinking the Boat vs. Missing the Boat

2011-11-04T16:07:00.000-04:00

by Virgil Carter

William C. Taylor’s latest book, Practically Radical: Not-So-Crazy Ways to Transform Your Company, Shake Up Your Industry and Challenge Yourself (William Morrow, 2011), suggests, among other things, that downturns in the economy are the very times to be innovating. Instead of worrying about sinking the boat, Taylor says leaders should be worried about not missing it! In a review by David K. Hurst, in Strategy + Business, Hurst points out that Taylor “advocates rocking the boat—that is, exploring “radical shifts that represent a direct challenge to convention and a break with the status quo”, while remaining realistic about your ability to make change happen.

Taylor, you may remember, is a former editor of the Harvard Business Review and cofounder of Fast Company magazine, and has been a leading writer and observer of the management revolution of creating agile organizations that engage their people so that they will innovate and create new ventures in the knowledge economy.

The book is organized in three segments: 1) improving your company; 2) creating successful new ventures, and 3) rethinking ones leadership style. Each segment of the book consists of themed chapters featuring “radically practical” truths, rules and habits. The appendix includes “ten questions that every game changer must answer”, such as “if your company went out of business tomorrow, who would miss you and why?”

Taylor suggests economic downturns are ideal times to be innovating in all of these categories. His point is that “instead of worrying about sinking the boat, one should be concerned with not missing it”. He suggests that this is as good a time as any for challenging the status quo.

For non-profit organizations that “always do it this way”, this may be the time and the book to that helps elevate the organizational vision. Two of the book’s chapters, titled “What your see shapes how you change” and “Where you look shapes what you see” could just be the eye-openers needed for a new status-quo.

Is Your Innovation Working?

2011-10-31T11:51:00.000-04:00

By Virgil Carter

Does your organization have the ability to innovate? Does it have the ability to deliver new and redesigned goods and services to your members and customers? Or do you do what you’ve always done, the way you’ve always done it?

Recent research by Booz & Company, reported by Anna Pettersson and August Viak in Strategy+Business, reveals an “unexpected and unheralded source of potential productivity: midlevel managers!” According to the article, organizations can raise their innovation productivity by recognizing and activating “the unique impact of leaders in the middle of the organization’s hierarchy”.

While the research was specifically focused on innovation in pharmaceutical companies, the findings have application to a wide range of organizations, including non-profit organizations. Among key findings were three key elements:

1. Clearly differentiated roles for senior, middle, and project managers. By formally defining the responsibilities of each level, organizations can take full advantage of the different contributions that people at each of these three levels (senior, middle, and project managers) can offer. And it can avoid the often inherent duplication and redundancy that may take place.

2. A focus on the pivotal roles across the middle. Managers in midlevel roles typically oversee groups of sufficient scale to develop expertise, create connections and opportunities for innovation, and marshal resources to support good ideas and to deliver results. Midlevel managers are well equipped to select and increase opportunities and can also guide promising ideas through the organization to make sure that they aren’t knocked out too easily in a process based on abstract criteria.

3. The development of critical skills within the middle-management group. To lead effectively, middle managers must have personal credibility. However, this is not enough. Effective leaders differentiate themselves in several key ways. For example, they define a compelling vision or destination for their team’s work products. Strong leaders must also connect beyond boundaries and establish critical networking interactions that are at the heart of innovation. Finally, midlevel manager must also utilize “multiple lenses” for problem solving, “applying insights gained from throughout the organization.

Use these elements to assess and build the needed training and support for the leadership capabilities of your middle management staff. Your organization’s innovation will be the beneficiary.

Want to Think Like an Innovator?

2011-10-24T09:08:00.004-04:00

by Virgil Carter

Want to be an effective innovator? How do innovators think? Harvard Business Review reported on an interview on the subject by contributing Editor Bronwyn Fryer. Fryer conducted a question-and-answer session with Professors Jeff Dyer of Brigham Young University and Hal Gregersen of Insead to explore how the "Innovators' DNA works”.

Dyer and Gregersen conducted a six-year study surveying 3,000 creative executives and conducting an additional 500 individual interviews. The study found five "discovery skills" that distinguish the executives.

Associating: a cognitive skill that allows creative people to make connections across seemingly unrelated questions, problems, or ideas
Questioning: an ability to ask "what if", "why", and "why not" questions that challenge the status quo and open up the bigger picture
Closely observe details: particularly the details of people's behavior.
Experiment: trying on new experiences and exploring new worlds
Ability to experiment: always trying on new experiences and exploring new worlds
Networking: connecting with smart people who have little in common with them, but from whom they can learn

“Overall, associating is the key skill because new ideas aren't created without connecting problems or ideas in ways that they haven't been connected before”, according to Dyer.

Dyer commented that one might summarize all of the skills they’ve noted in one word: "inquisitiveness." “I spent 20 years studying great global leaders, and that was the big common denominator. It's the same kind of inquisitiveness you see in small children”, he commented.

Dyer asked the executives in their study to tell them about how they came up with a strategic or innovative idea. That one was easy for the creative executives, but surprisingly difficult for the more traditional ones. Interestingly, all the innovative entrepreneurs also talked about being triggered, or having what one might call "eureka" moments. In describing how they came up with a product or business idea, they would use phrases like "I saw someone doing this, or I overheard someone say that, and that's when it hit me."

In conclusion, Dyer added, “We also believe that the most innovative entrepreneurs were very lucky to have been raised in an atmosphere where inquisitiveness was encouraged. We were stuck by the stories they told about being sustained by people who cared about experimentation and exploration.”

Hope for Daydreamers!

2011-10-17T09:04:00.000-04:00

by Virgil Carter

Are you one of those many people who mind seems to wander from time to time? Do you have stray thoughts? Do you daydream? Well take hope! In a New York Times article, author John Tierney writes that researchers have been analyzing these behaviors, and they’ve found daydreaming to be remarkably common¬ and often quite useful. “A wandering mind can protect you from immediate perils and keep you on course toward long-term goals”, he writes. Tierney notes that sometimes daydreaming is counterproductive, but sometimes it fosters creativity and helps you solve problems.

Mind wandering, as psychologists define it, is a subcategory of daydreaming, which is the broad term for all stray thoughts and fantasies, including those moments you deliberately set aside to imagine yourself winning the lottery or accepting the Nobel. But when you’re trying to accomplish one thing and lapse into “task-unrelated thoughts,” that’s mind wandering.

During waking hours, people’s minds seem to wander about 30 percent of the time, according to estimates by psychologists who have interrupted people throughout the day to ask what they’re thinking. If you’re driving down a straight, empty highway, your mind might be wandering three-quarters of the time, according to two of the leading researchers, Jonathan Schooler and Jonathan Smallwood of the University of California, Santa Barbara.

“People assume mind wandering is a bad thing, but if we couldn’t do it during a boring task, life would be horrible,” Dr. Smallwood says. “Imagine if you couldn’t escape mentally from a traffic jam.”

Where exactly does the mind go during those moments? By observing people at rest during brain scans, neuroscientists have identified a “default network” that is active when people’s minds are especially free to wander. When people do take up a task, the brain’s executive network lights up to issue commands, and the default network is often suppressed.

To encourage the creative process, researchers say, it may help if you go jogging, take a walk, do some knitting or just sit around doodling, because relatively undemanding tasks seem to free your mind to wander productively. But you also want to be able to catch yourself at the Eureka moment.

“For creativity you need your mind to wander,” Dr. Schooler says, “but you also need to be able to notice that you’re mind wandering and catch the idea when you have it. If Archimedes had come up with a solution in the bathtub but didn’t notice he’d had the idea, what good would it have done him?”

Going Global by Going Local

2011-10-10T09:05:00.000-04:00

By Virgil Carter

Many non-profit organizations are looking for growth by developing strategies aimed at emerging-market nations. And for good reason. Consider the fact that “in 15 years’ time, 57 percent of the nearly one billion households with earnings greater than $20,000 a year will live in the developing world. Emerging markets will represent an even larger share of the growth in product categories, such as automobiles, that are highly mature in developed economies”, according to a recent article in the McKinsey Quarterly. Seven emerging economies—China, India, Brazil, Mexico, Russia, Turkey, and Indonesia—are expected to contribute about 45 percent of global GDP growth in the coming decade. Authors Yuval Atsmon, Ari Kertesz and Ireena Vittal write that there are significant growth opportunities for organizations that develop the right strategy to tap into these markets. What’s the right strategy?

According to the authors, as developing economies become increasingly diverse and competitive, global organizations will need strategic approaches to understand the variance within countries and to concentrate resources on the most promising submarkets. The authors suggest a concept they call “city clusters”, a collection of relatively homogenous, fast-growing cities. They quickly point out those countries such as China, India and Brazil different significantly in their development and markets, making a one-size-fits-all strategy ineffective. Of course, most leading corporations have learned to address different markets in Europe and the United States. But in the emerging world, there is a compelling case for learning the ropes much faster than most companies feel comfortable doing.

The appropriate strategic approach will depend on the characteristics of a national market (including its stage of urbanization), as well as a company’s size, position, and aspirations in it. What’s clear, according to the authors, is that traditional country strategies and other aggregated approaches will miss the mark because they can’t account for the variability and rapid change in these markets. As the battle for the emerging-market shifts into higher gear, organizations that think about growth opportunities at a more granular level have a better chance of winning.

Notice of Joan's Passing

2011-10-07T13:58:00.000-04:00

Joan Cassedy was our beloved colleague and friend. No one could know Joan and not be caught up in her great heart. Her laugh was infectious, her compassion sincere, and her caring presence was a soothing balm to all who had the good fortune to know her. She will be missed so very, very much.

Our thoughts and prayers go out to Joan’s large family and even larger community of friends. Your tragedy is ours. Please pray for Joan, her family, friends and her colleagues here.

How To Get Fired in 10 Easy Steps

2011-10-03T09:20:00.000-04:00

by Virgil R. Carter

Last month we wrote about interviews and “Seven Questions That Can Kill Careers”. This month, let’s look at how you can lose your job in ten easy steps. We’re indebted to Kelly Eggers’ recent article from the Wall Street Journal, “Ten Things That Can Get You Fired”.

Of course, poor performance or antagonistic relationships are always causes for being fired. But there are more subtle ways. For example:

Sick every Monday: According to Eggers’ article, frequently calling in sick on Monday is a good way to get your pink slip. Same goes for Fridays.
Be disgusting: When one’s appearance and hygiene aren’t the best, this is a wonderfully effective way to collect unemployment checks. If this applies, your only option is to find a one-person office!
Have it your way: Unless you are the Top Boss, it doesn’t pay to appear to be single-minded and critical of other’s ideas and work.
Be Anonymous: This is the opposite of having it your own way. Keeping your head down and being invisible is a good way to not be remembered when it’s time to count heads and reduce staff.
Criticize your boss with association members: This is my favorite. Members love gossip. Revealing your opinion of your boss as stupid, incompetent and a cheat to your non-profit members is like talking through an amplified microphone. It’s career suicide, even if you’re right!

What are the other ways to stand in the unemployment line? According to Eggers they are: 6) Lie on your employment application; 7) Be ungrateful; 8) Spend time with the organization’s complainers, non-performers and gossips; 9) Never take responsibility when things go wrong; and 10) Take credit for other people’s work.

If you’re looking for extra time for yourself this summer, give a couple of these a try!

For the full article visit: http://www.fins.com/Finance/Articles/SB130747091120722005/Ten-Things-That-Can-Get-You-Fired?Type=5&reflink=djm_emailfinshouse_jun3011_djwos

Are You and Your Organization Looking for Growth?

2011-09-26T09:22:00.000-04:00

by Virgil R. Carter

Are you and your non-profit organization looking for growth opportunities? Are you considering globalization? A recent article “Drawing a new road map for growth”, by Sumit Dora, Sven Smit and Patrick Viguerie, published in the McKinsey Quarterly, reports on findings showing how large and small for-profit companies grow. Are there some lessons here for non-profit organizations?

Finding 1: Multiple avenues to growth produces better results in good times and bad.

Organizational growth has three traditional drivers, according to the authors. These are: 1) portfolio momentum, or the market growth of the segments in an organization’s portfolio; 2) mergers and acquisitions; and 3) market share gains. The authors cite their study showing that organizations outperforming their peers on two or three of these drivers grow faster and achieve better returns than organizations that outperform on just one driver. Organizations that fared better in the economic downturn grew in multiple ways.

Finding 2: Organizations in emerging market economies grow faster than those in developed economies.

Organizations in the study from emerging markets are outgrowing competitors from developed markets at a “startling pace”. The wide gap in growth between emerging economy organizations and organizations in developed economies “suggests that companies should ask themselves whether they are paying enough attention to emerging markets and allocating sufficient financial and human resources to them. Chances are the answer is no”.

Finding 3: Smaller companies rely on market share growth and momentum for growth.

Small companies in the author’s study are growing by increasing their market share “to a much greater extent than large companies”. Smaller companies, without the significant share positions in mature markets, usually grow faster than their parent industry or profession, according to the authors, because they “are not constrained by size, and their growth is often based on a new business model they can pursue without fear of cannibalizing revenues.”

For the full article visit: https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Strategy/Growth/Drawing_a_new_road_map_for_growth_2782

Is Your Organization Using Too Much Strategy?

2011-09-16T16:50:00.000-04:00

by Virgil R. Carter

The strategic plan for many non-profit organizations is an extensive, all-encompassing document. Such strategy espouses politically correct multitudes of competitive demands and interests from across the organization. “Too much strategy” focuses on the process and nomenclature of broad goals, objectives, vision and values. As a result, more often than not the strategy goes up on the shelf and organizational life goes on.

In an article, “The perils of bad strategy”, author and UCLA management professor Richard Rumell, describes the importance of seeing bad strategy and countering it with good strategy. Too much strategy, or bad strategy, has four characteristics, according to Rumell:

· The failure to face the challenge;

· Mistaking goals for strategy;

· Bad strategic objectives

· Fluff

When is there too much (bad) strategy? Rumell says it’s because: 1) the inability to focus and make choices; 2) template-style planning, using the formula of “vision, mission, values, and strategies”.

How to focus your organization on good, productive and useful strategy: focus on what’s important! There are three elements for focused, useful strategy:

· Diagnosis: identifying the critical aspects of the situation;

· Guiding policy: an approach that will overcome the challenges in the diagnosis;

· Focused actions: coordinated steps to achieve the guiding policy

Does your organizational strategy focus on the crucial factors for your organization and a direction for addressing the factors? Or do you have too much strategy?

For the full article visit: https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Strategy/Strategic_Thinking/The_perils_of_bad_strategy_2826

The Comma

2011-09-12T13:14:00.002-04:00

By Jane M. La Barbera, CAE

Managing Director, Association of American Law Schools

During a particularly rough period of months when an individual was conducting a daily campaign against us because he did not like an action that the association was taking, I received a call from a former President of the Association, now a President of a university. He asked me how I was doing and I told him the candid truth. His response was that it was all about the “comma.” It was something his insightful son had expressed to him.

The university president had only been his job three weeks when he was being criticized for a particular issue that had occurred long before he arrived. His son commented that the comma adds to your name a designation that you represent an institution including all its history before and during the time that you are in the position. Your name alone means little to the outside world. The comma gives you wonderful experiences and it also allows others to critically assess your work and that of the association.

Think of the people you have met and the places you have been because of your position; e.g., talking to Toni Morrison, the Nobel Laureate and Pulitzer Prize winning author; being a guest at the exquisite US consulate on the Arno in Florence on a sparkling beautiful evening; and meeting the Australian Governor General at her grand estate in Canberra. For the same reasons that you have access to people and places that you would not normally have without the comma after your name, you are celebrated and assessed based on the association that you represent.

What does all this mean? The comma reminds us that we are ordinary individuals who find ourselves with the privilege of representing institutions. It means that while our members may express their unhappiness with us, they can also be overly complimentary because we can impact the trajectory of careers. We remind ourselves to take the compliments and the critical comments with a grain of salt. Would we be treated the same if we did not have the comma? No, we would not.

On the other hand, we are at risk for our jobs for making decisions that can make us appear brilliant or idiotic. It is the risk of decision-making, which makes failure and success only separated by a thread of difference. The comma gives us great privilege; and it gives us a richer, but, riskier life. It reminds us of the importance of humility because but for that comma, we would not be seen as representing this important institution in both its failings and in its honors.

May We Have a Little Passion With That?

2011-09-02T12:27:00.002-04:00

by Steven Worth

When I was a young person working in the US Senate I recall being puzzled by the clinical, intellectual approach of some orators who would lay out their position on a particular subject in a very matter of fact way, and then respond in the same manner should any objection be raised by someone in the opposition. Many times these were very smart, honest, and thoughtful public servants whose arguments made all the sense in the world to me—but there was just no spark there to drive the point home or to give pause to anyone who would oppose them.

Was this lack of passion the result of weariness, of having fought the battle too long to expect anything positive to come of it? Or was it due to the sheer intellectual self-confidence of a person who knows that common sense will carry the day eventually?

In this vein, Winston Churchill famously noted that “One can always count on the Americans to do the right thing….after they have tried everything else…” Perhaps Churchill was only humorously echoing the optimism in President Lincoln’s own observation that “You can fool, some of the people all the time and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.”

Somehow I do not feel quite so sanguine that reason will always prevail. In fact I feel more in sympathy with William Butler Yeats’ worried observation that “the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”

I know, I know, the last thing we need is more arm waving demagogues; but how can one feel inspired to follow, if our leaders do not back their words with a passion that underscores their belief in what they are saying?

Making Assumptions: Visas

2011-08-29T13:01:00.003-04:00

by Jane M. La Barbera, CAE, Managing Director, Association of American Law Schools

Making arrangements for visas for professors located around the world has been an eye opening and educational experience. In 2004 we had an international conference in the US and we had such trouble bringing non-US professors to the conference. We were frustrated with the difficulty of inviting these well-respected leaders to the US.

As the years continued, in every country where we held a conference we faced difficulty in bringing conference delegates from developing countries. I blamed the delegates, assuming that they waited until the last minute to obtain their visas. This caused a mad scramble of activity weeks and days before the meeting dates even though we had issued the letters of invitations many months before. Usually, the consulate asked for more information at the last minute and we had to have the host university issue all communications on their letterhead in their language to the consulate. At this point, airfares were much higher in cost and hotel rooms might not be available.

It was a conversation with a distinguished African professor that enlightened me about my perspective on visas. She said that obtaining visas was another privilege of which those from developed countries were easily given and we had no clue as to the experience of someone from a developing country. She explained that while she and many of her colleagues from developing countries would request the visa as soon as the months in advance conference invitation was received, the consulates often did not act on these visa requests until the very last minute. Conference delegates would have to rush to obtain and complete all visa documents in order as soon as the invitation arrived, then constantly contact the consulate to see if the visa had been processed and they would be told over and over that it was being processed, if they received an answer at all.

In addition, many countries do not have consulates or embassies in every country or there might be one location in a very large country. We paid for a Senegal delegate to fly and stay in the US to obtain the visa from the Argentinian consulate (where the conference was to be held), rather than have them fly to a nearby African country to obtain the visa. Why? First, the consulate in the other African country was not open every day; we could fly this individual to that country and we could not rely that the consulate would see them on a timely basis because those from the country where the consulate was located would have first priority to be seen. To my surprise, it was cheaper to have the individual fly to the US, where they could attend another conference, go to the Argentinian Consulate in the US, make an appointment to fill out the application and have it processed before she left the US. It was also more reliable.

I am constantly reminded, especially, in the international arena, of uninformed assumptions that I make where my experience is limited to the perspective of someone from a privileged developed country.

Should Your Organization Be Centralized?

2011-08-22T09:08:00.000-04:00

by Virgil R. Carter

As non-profit organizations look for growth and opportunity, a key question arises about the organization’s operations: should the organization be centralized? Centralization appears to offer some advantages: planning and production efficiencies, reduced overhead, improved quality, more predictable scheduling, and more reliable distribution and customer service. But is this really true?

Centralization vs. decentralization is a predictable and perennial tug-of-war between advocates for each. It is a dilemma for organizational leaders. Now, in a recent article by Andrew Campbell, Sven Junisch and Gunter Muller-Stewens, published in the McKinsey Quarterly, the authors describe how organizational leaders can lead a more thoughtful debate by asking three questions.

The three questions each pose a test that must be considered by any centralization proposal. A decision to centralize requires an affirmative answer to at least one of the three questions. The questions are:

Is centralization mandated: Does the organization have a choice? For example the corporation annual report and consolidated tax filing are required by law and must be signed by the CEO, making this function impossible to delegate to subordinate units. Thus the response is yes to centralizing this activity.

Does centralization add significant value (a minimum of 10%): The authors write that if centralization is not mandated, it should only be adopted if it adds substantial value. Without significant added value, the risks of centralization may not be worth taking.

Are the risks low: Proposals for centralization should proceed only if negative side effects are low. The authors suggest that an initiative for centralizing payroll is a likely example of low negative side effects.

If you and your organization are facing a centralization decision, you may want to consider these three questions.

For the full article click here.

Health vs. Performance

2011-08-12T15:44:00.002-04:00

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.

Killer Questions

2011-08-08T10:20:00.001-04:00

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.

The First Timeless Pillar of Leadership

2011-08-04T09:48:00.000-04:00

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.

CEOs and Organizational Models

2011-08-01T08:48:00.000-04:00

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.

Healthy Fervor

2011-07-28T10:27:00.000-04:00

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.

CEOs and Creativity: A Good Match?

2011-07-18T10:30:00.000-04:00

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.

Have You Considered An Executive Coach?

2011-07-11T12:19:00.000-04:00

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.

Six Questions for Globalization: Part One

2011-07-05T16:05:00.000-04:00

by Virgil A. Carter

Six Questions for Globalization

Is your non-profit organization considering globalization? Or have you already begun efforts towards becoming a global organization, and are wondering what’s next? Here’s the first part of six key questions which may help guide your organization’s discussions and decisions about going global.

1. What does success look like?

Has your organization reached agreement on what constitutes success? Establishing and communicating clear, measurable benchmarks for success—strategic and operational--may be one of the single greatest ways of realizing success in globalization, and avoiding the criticism inherent in attempting worldwide leadership. Identifying success measures also supports continuing assessment of whether or not your association has the proper business model and business plans needed for successfully achieving the measures. Success measures and business models go hand in hand. It’s hard to have one without the other.

2. Does your organization offer open and equal leadership opportunities for members, regardless of geography?

Members and customers, regardless of geography, want to have something to say about (and participate in) the direction of the organization they support, and the quality and timeliness of your goods and services. Otherwise, they let their feet do the talking, and walk to another association that is more open and responsive. Global organizations have to find ways to share in leadership opportunities, regardless of geography. When was the last time your board’s chairman was from an emerging market country, or you held a board meeting in an emerging market country?

3. Should dues differ and reflect the annual salaries and earnings of members in emerging market and other nations?

Airline tickets and hotel reservations are no longer are priced at a single rate for all users. World-wide air travelers know that air fares purchased outside the U.S. tend to be cheaper than those of U.S. carriers (thanks to host government subsidies in many cases). Why should association dues be any different, especially when your annual dues in U.S. dollars may represent a host country amount equal to perhaps 20-25% of the annual salary of a potential member? The opposite side of this issue, however, is that expenses to support a new or renewing non-U.S. member generally exceed those of a U.S. member (at least for associations whose major business units reside totally in the U.S, and whose service must originate from the U.S.). What to do? Successful global organizations are likely to be those whose dues recognize the differential abilities to pay, and who can provide needed services and value outside the domestic U.S.

Where are our Leaders?

2011-07-05T16:03:00.000-04:00

by Steven Worth

When leaders have so much vested in just keeping their jobs, are they able, in fact, to lead? When stakeholders realize that the one they have chosen to lead them is so desperately trying to hold onto their job, are they able entirely to trust that he or she can or will perform their leadership function with complete integrity?

How many leaders spend more time and effort schmoozing their board chairs than advancing their organization’s mission? How many would rather spend their association’s funds on five star accommodations for their board members rather than new strategic initiatives based on solid market research?

Rather than envy, the sight of CEOs enjoying high six or seven figure salaries, lavish living accommodations, and first class transportation should inspire head shaking pity instead. One can be sure that these poor souls in their gilded cages will do whatever it takes….but to what end? Do their visions exceed their own persons? More often than not their numbers of years in office are their only legacy. Many leaders’ styles remind us of Shelly’s poem…

I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

Give us leaders instead who inspire others to do more than they thought they could—whose time in office is measured by a world that is better for their efforts, and whose tenure is marked more by its quality than its length. Such leaders exist, but there never can be enough of them.

Six Questions for Globalization: Part Two

2011-06-30T11:42:00.000-04:00

By Virgil R. Carter

Is your non-profit organization considering globalization? Or have you already begun efforts towards becoming a global organization, and are wondering what’s next? Here’s the second part of six key questions which may help guide your organization’s discussions and decisions about going global.

1. Are your globally available goods and services: a) timely; b) affordable; c) culturally and regionally relevant; d) available in the host country language?

The importance of this question is probably self-explanatory, but many nonprofits haven’t made the necessary important investments in their goods and services to ensure that they offer global value in a global market. It is all too common for U. S. nonprofits to believe that because they offer goods and services, there is interest and demand outside the U.S. Goods and services that are accessible in a timely manner, that have regional content, and have opportunity for host country language are among those that clearly bring highest value to the host country markets and customers.

2. Does your association work with, for, against or ignore similar host country associations?

Sooner or later each association must have a policy and a business plan that provides consistent guidance in situations when there are similar associations, providing similar goods and services, elsewhere in the world. Cooperation and mutual respect is always a good goal, but it can be challenging to achieve. An effective approach for building good relations among similar global organizations is to launch annual exchange visits, followed by low-risk, low-threat joint activities. An early atmosphere of camaraderie and mutual purpose goes a long way towards building good long-term working relationships. Once established, these relationships will be immeasurable in maintaining cooperation and mutual respect.

3. Are you patient?

Globalization is a challenge. It’s usually a substantial investment, and it’s generally not a quick return on investment. It’s a challenge to prepare a suitable business plan and to use resources wisely. It’s a challenge to show measurable results. Patience is required (along with sound business planning and processes). Be prepared and prepare your volunteer leaders. You will be tested.

For those who have successful answers to these questions, you will find globalization to be a rewarding way for your association to continue to do business and to provide the leadership that is the basis for your mission. Good luck!

Connections between Strategy and Operations

2011-06-27T09:23:00.000-04:00

by Virgil R. Carter

Most non-profit organizations have a strategic plan. Virtually all of these organizations also have an annual operating budget. Some organizations also develop and use an annual business or operational plan. But what’s the connection among these? How can you, your staff and volunteer leaders assess the connection between your strategy and annual operations?

The business press frequently hosts readable articles on the important connection between strategy and operations. Although written for business, many topics are equally useful for non-profit organizations. Colorful titles suggest the importance of the issue, including “Putting Leadership Back Into Strategy”, “Mastering the Management System”, “Five Competitive Forces That Shape Strategy” and the compelling “Innovation Killers: How Financial Tools Destroy Your Capacity to Do New Things”. These topics are as common to the non-profit world as the for-profit world.

I have worked with the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) as a tool to identify strategy and successfully link it with operations, enabling an organization to successfully cascade strategy throughout the organization’s operations, using metrics and key initiatives. One of the compelling concepts of the BSC is “balance”—a balanced approach for each organization. Using the BSC, it is even possible to embed strategy in annual performance planning and evaluation for staff and volunteers. “Mastering the Management System” by Kaplan and Norton, the Harvard Business School professors who are the founders and developers of the Balanced Scorecard, is one important read for those looking for ways to better connect strategy with operations.

Here’s an important connection between strategy and operations: “Successful strategy execution has two basic rules: understand the management cycle that links strategy and operations, and know what tools to apply at each stage of the cycle”, write authors, Norton and Kaplan

Want to improve the connections between your strategy and operations? Think about your annual management cycle and how the various elements of your annual cycle can be best integrated with your overall strategy. How can your annual budgeting cycle be linked to your strategy? How can your business planning cycle be linked to your strategy? How can you develop usable metrics and evaluations to assess your operations and the extent to which they support your organization’s strategy?

The Four-Hour Workweek Phenomenon—and How It Can Work for Your Association

2011-06-20T09:22:00.000-04:00

by Virgil R. Carter

Tim Ferriss started a mini-revolution and a lot of dreams when he published his groundbreaking book, The Four-Work Week. Suddenly, everyone was talking about how they can work better, not harder.

In my consultancy, I have encountered several forces of opposition to the fundamental tenet of the book—let technology execute the functions that are repetitive and administrative, freeing the senior staff and executives to long-term goals and strategy. What are the barriers?

• Fear of Change—that’s a common one and easy to set aside while more substantial issues are addressed.
• Lack of Funds—Yes, technology is an investment, but it is exactly that, an investment that, if properly selected and implemented, will reap rewards multiple times over in productivity.
• Hesitance to Give Up the Personal Touch—Many clients report “we have a certain number of older members who can’t deal with this” or “We want to be there for our members.” It’s fine to cater to members who have not yet gotten on the bandwagon of technology, but their numbers are declining. Many members prefer to simply register online without the “personal touch”—just get it done, in other words.
• Embracing the “All Things to All Members” Syndrome—How often have we heard “Our society/association/foundation is different,” “We can’t modify our processes to adapt to the technology”

What is frequently lacking is a rigorous evaluation of the opportunities available to the nonprofit from technology adaptation with

What to do About Silos?

2011-06-13T09:15:00.000-04:00

Virgil R. Carter

You know silos. According to Wikipedia: “A silo is a structure for storing bulk materials. Silos are used in agriculture to store grain (see grain elevators) or fermented feed known as silage. Silos are more commonly used for bulk storage of grain, coal, cement, carbon black, woodchips, food products and sawdust.”

In non-profit organizations silos tend to result from “vertically” structured organizations where each major business function—education, publications, meetings, etc.—is a stand-alone, fully self-contained business operation.

Silos tend to reflect an inward focus by an organization. That’s because silos tend to focus inwardly on doing the things that those in the silo “like to do”. It frequently doesn’t matter (to those in the silo) if there is a market for their products, or if operations are profitable. And there’s the major issue with silos: silos are often characterized by the interests of the silo taking precedence over the interests of the organization as a whole. Further, it’s not uncommon for there to be strong competition among silos for organizational resources—financial and human. The result? The more silos that an organization has, the more that internal competition may inhibit organizational responsiveness, performance and viability. Am I right on this?

Is there an alternative for improved organizational performance? Here it is folks: market focus! That’s it: market focus.

Market focus means identifying the markets critical to organizational success as the basis for the development and sales of all of an organization’s goods and services. This involves “the voice of the customer”: learning and understanding the customer’s expectations and requirements, delighting customers and building loyalty. This is a far cry from “producing what we like to produce” and trying to get someone to buy it.

This can be a cultural and functional shift for non-profits where volunteers in silos “do what they like to do”. Market focus is an “external view”, as opposed to silo’s “internal view”. Implementing market focus, using the voice of the customer, involves an annual process to assess and guide an organization’s portfolio of goods and services. This means encouraging and supporting innovation for new programs; it means sunsetting some existing programs, in a planned, orderly basis.

Market focus means new opportunities. New opportunities mean new revenues and resources, which will benefit all organizational members and customers. Want to trade your silos for new opportunities? Become market focused!

CEOs and Volunteers

2011-06-06T09:18:00.000-04:00

By Virgil R. Carter

Experienced CEOs know that job tenure can be fleeting. CEO tenure is often volatile—a situation that cannot benefit the organization, the CEO or the organization’s members. Why such a situation?
Closer examination often reveals the following: volunteers usually care passionately about the association. Many volunteers are leading figures in their field. While many volunteers are subject-matter experts, many have little leadership experience in the unique setting of nonprofit, volunteer-led organizations.
By comparison, many CEOs spend years expanding their enterprise-wide leadership and management knowledge of nonprofits. Many CEOs actively participate in the broader nonprofit world. Compounding this disparity of knowledge and experience is the fact that roles and responsibilities of volunteer leaders and CEOs often are highly ambiguous. Even where there are written policies, there may be many more unwritten policies actually determining who does what, when, and how. Sound familiar?
What can be done to reduce tension between volunteers and CEOs? One important improvement is forging and maintaining a volunteer-staff partnership built on two categories of activity essential for many non-profit associations:

Mission-driven activities: These activities tend to represent the purpose of the organization. These activities motivate volunteers and are where most want to be active. These activities, which are rightly led and populated by volunteers, may produce few revenues and may be largely subsidized. This financial situation may be coupled with volunteer assertions that association activities shouldn’t produce revenues over expenses, to keep volunteer costs to a minimum. Mission-driven activities are critical. There is nothing wrong with subsidized activities, so long as revenues from other sources are available for the needed subsidies.

Business operations activities: These activities are where most of the positive revenue is created to subsidize mission-driven activities. Because they are profit-and-loss oriented, they must be staff led and managed, since volunteers simply have neither the access nor the time to manage business affairs in the timely and agile manner required. A caution: business activities must be related to the mission, as much as subsidized activities.

Clear roles: Establishing clear roles and accountabilities for these two categories of association activity enables volunteer leaders and CEOs to play to their respective strengths. Such clarity, coupled with good communications, enables effective leadership, improved relationships, and strengthened organizational performance.
Leadership role clarity is an important step to transform tension between volunteer leaders and CEOs into productive partnership. The results—more effective volunteers, stability in CEO tenure, and more successful, enjoyable associations—make the partnership worth everyone’s effort.

Building A Better Executive Team in Three Steps

2011-05-31T09:04:00.000-04:00

Virgil R. Carter

Many non-profit organizations and their CEOs depend on a staff executive team to help lead the non-profit to be a consistently successful organization. The day of a “one person” leadership team, in most organizations, is long gone. Are there ways for the executive team to function better? According to an article in McKinsey Quarterly, authored by Michiel Knuyt, Judy Malan and Rachel Tuffield, “few teams function as well as they could”. The authors write that there are three important steps that can be taken for more effective executive teams. Consider the following:

Get the right people on the team…and the wrong ones off: Remember the advice to “get the right people on the bus”? The matching critical ingredient is to help the “wrong” people find a new and different opportunity that more closely fits their capabilities. CEOs are responsible for selecting the staff executive team. The authors note that this responsibility “…typically requires conscious attention and courage from the CEO, otherwise, the top team can under deliver for an extended period of time.” Without the right people, the executive team’s performance will be limited.

Ensure the team works on only what it can do: The purpose and focus of the top staff team is critical. It’s up to the CEO to communicate the purpose and focus of the executive team, and to closely monitor the team’s adherence to the purpose and focus. Like committees everywhere, left alone the team will look for things to do that seem interesting and that justify the team’s existence. Thus, purpose and focus must be carefully drawn and matched to the unique needs of the nonprofit organization. Often, projects with critical cross-functional or cross regional programs provide valuable work for the top team.

Keep team dynamics and processes positive and productive: CEOs must give “unrelenting attention” to the productive collaboration of the top staff executive team. It is all too common for executive teams to become dysfunctional over opposing priorities, entrenched thinking, competitive views, and the like. CEOs must lead their executive teams, setting the example and addressing the dynamics of their team, while dealing with concrete business issues.

With a staff executive team that is willing and able to effectively do its work, a non-profit organization can achieve a major performance improvement. For the full article, see https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Organization/Talent/Three_steps_to_building_a_better_top_team_2743

Enduring Ideas: Understanding Your Organization

2011-05-23T09:10:00.000-04:00

By Virgil Carter

Are you trying to better understand your organization? Are you responsible for innovation and constructive change in your association? Perhaps you’re considering an organizational and career change, and are thinking about what makes organizations successful. If so, a McKinsey Quarterly article may be interesting. “A Watershed in Thinking About Organizations” is an April 2008 McKinsey article that revisits their 7-S Framework, introduced in the 1970s. The interactive article, the first in a series, “reflects on 7-S…introduced…to address the critical role of coordination, rather than structure, in organizational effectiveness.” Readers can click on any of the seven elements in the framework and listen to McKinsey’s description of the element.

The article can be found here:
http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Strategy/Strategic_Thinking/Enduring_ideas_The_7-S_Framework_2123_abstract

The article goes on to note “While an increasingly complex business environment has rendered some (organizational) models obsolete, others have endured.” McKinsey says the series presents “frameworks that are as relevant today as they were when first created.”

The 7-S framework “maps seven interrelated factors that influence an organization’s ability to change—shared values, skills, staff, strategy, style and systems—and shows how these forces interact”. The framework suggests that achieving progress in any one part of the framework “will be hard to achieve without progress in the others.”

Sparking Creativity in Your Organization

2011-05-16T09:03:00.000-04:00

by Virgil R. Carter

Are you looking for more creative ideas and output in your organization? In a recent article in McKinsey Quarterly, authors Marla Capozzi, Renee Dye and Amy Howe write that organizations can use “relatively simple techniques to boost the creative output of employees at any level”. This may be particularly important in many non-profit organizations, where strategy and operations follow a predictable path, year after year, while the external environment is constantly changing.

According to the authors there are four practical ways to face the “we’ve always done it this way” mentality and to encourage new creativity. The four ways are:

--Break free of pre-existing ideas: Go outside your current workplace for firsthand experiences than differ from and challenge the normal way of doing things.

--Identify and challenge core beliefs: what if the “conventional wisdom” didn’t exist? Look for new ways and opportunities to explore.

--Use the power of association: comparisons between one company/product/situation and another, seemingly unrelated one, can “stir the imagination” and spark idea generation.

--Invoke constraints: using constraints on your business model can help spark creativity. For example, what if your dues revenues are reduced by half; what if another organization begins to offer similar products?

The authors note, “Creativity is not a trait reserved for the lucky few. By immersing your people in unexpected environments, confronting ingrained orthodoxies, using analogies and challenging your organization to overcome difficult constraints, you can dramatically boost their creative output—and your own.” For the full article, see: https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Strategy/Strategy_in_Practice/Sparking_creativity_in_teams_An_executives_guide_2786

CEO Agreements: 5 Things to Get In Writing!

2011-05-09T09:19:00.000-04:00

by Virgil R. Carter

Want to be a CEO? Already a CEO, but switching jobs? Here are five components of your employment agreement that are important to consider.

1. Duties: Are the roles, duties and authority of the CEO clearly stated? Is it clear the CEO is singularly responsible for staff, budgets, contracts, and other essentials? Can these duties be changed, and if so, by whom and how? Are changes (change of duties, change of role or authority, reorganization, merger, acquisition, cessation of operations, etc) considered as termination for good reason?

2. Compensation, benefits & annual review: What is the base compensation? What are the types of variable compensation, e.g., bonus, commission, etc.? Are other types of compensation appropriate, e.g., one-time (moving, relocation, etc.) and/or recurring (car, travel, business club, etc)? Will compensation be established and maintained as “market rate” and how will market rate be determined annually? Who participates in the decisions? Does the association’s standard benefits package apply to the CEO? How is annual performance planning and evaluation conducted? Who leads the annual review process? Who participates in the process?

3. Term & renewal: Is there a reasonable initial term of employment? When and how will the initial term be extended or renewed? Who participates in the decision? What if there is no formal action to renew the term—does it renew automatically, or is it considered involuntary termination?

4. Termination: How will unfavorable “termination for cause” be defined? How will other types of favorable terminations (voluntary, involuntary and for good reason) be identified and defined? How are the termination definitions linked to compensation, benefits and any special termination pay-outs, e.g., termination in first year of employment, termination after first year, involuntary termination, for good reason, etc.?

5. Restrictions: Are there personal or professional restrictions on the CEO while employed, and/or upon termination? For example, can the CEO teach, write, do research or other similar activities, while employed? Upon termination, can the CEO immediately work for another association in the same geographical area? Can the CEO immediately approach employees of her/his former organization about career changes?

Thinking about these key parts of your CEO employment agreement and reaching mutually agreeable resolution with your volunteer leaders will help to establish your credibility as a senior executive. It will also make your life a lot more enjoyable. Good luck!

A Different Twist on Budgeting

2011-05-02T09:20:00.000-04:00

by Steven H. Davis

As we all know, the annual pursuit of a properly balanced budget can be an arduous task. For most of us, there are three gates that must be transited. First, there is arriving at consensus at the staff level (lots of competing projects and activities vying for the available dollars), and then there is getting over the Finance Committee hump in the process (keeping folks out of the weeds can be an issue), and then there is the pursuit of approval from the elected leadership (here as well keeping folks out of the weeds can be a problem).

We all have our set approaches, our traditional issues, and our approaches to overcoming those issues. What I want to share in this posting is a process that I have refined in recent years that seems to facilitate an easy transit through all three of the gates mentioned above.

Step 1: Staff budget managers (managers, directors and the executive director) together prioritize all planned new objectives, based on set criteria, including strategic value to the membership and resource requirements to accomplish. Objectives are prioritized under each Strategic Plan Goal, with each goal treated equally. Doing this in group fashion eliminates the lobbying that often occurs in this part of the process.

Step 2: The elected leadership then goes through a similar exercise in one of its official meetings, taking staff’s priorities and reordering them as they feel is needed. This is a critical step.

Step 3: Staff then pursues an initial budget that only includes already approved activity …none of the prioritized new activity is included in this first cut. Our experience is that this leaves an in-the-black budget with a sizeable net positive.

Step 4: Staff then adds new activity to the budget, based on the leadership’s prioritization, until that net positive is narrowed-down to the desirable figure. A key in this step is to ensure that adequate resources exist to accomplish budgeted new objectives …most importantly staffing.

Step 5: Staff evaluates all current programming for sunsetting. The focus is on current value to the members, as determined through member surveys and staff/volunteer perceptions.

Step 6: Staff provides the elected leadership with draft guidelines for it to modify & approve that will outline their intentions for the Finance Committee’s role in the budgeting process. These guidelines are focused on keeping the FC strategically focused and not in the weeds. They focus the committee on evaluating the staff’s budget justifications, not the detail.

Step 7: Armed with the formally approved guidelines and the leadership’s new-objective prioritizations, the Finance Committee then works through the process fairly expeditiously and ultimately approves supporting the draft budget to the elected leadership for approval.

Step 8: Reviewing proposed new activity based on its own prioritizations, the elected leadership then has a fairly clean ride through its part of the process.

No budgeting process is perfect, but the one just outlined seems to facilitate a fairly smooth transit to a strategically focused budget that can be readily embraced by everyone.

Organizational Strength through Diversification

2011-04-25T09:22:00.001-04:00

By Virgil R. Carter

With the emerging indications of economic strengthening, it may be time for CEOs, staff and volunteer leaders to do a quick check on the strength of their organizations. Is your organization economically strong? Do you have the protection and advantage of economic diversification?

A recent Strategy+Business article, “A Continuous Quest for Economic Balance”, by Richard Shediac, Chadi N. Moujaes and Mazen Ramsay Najjar, focuses on the important economic diversification of countries. Much of what they write has equal application to the strength and well-being of many of our non-profit organizations.

For example, the authors write “Countries can be over-concentrated in any number of ways—for example, relying too heavily on large companies, exports, or foreign investment—and even countries that appear extremely diversified may still be vulnerable to unexpected events.” How applicable is this to your organization?

A quick check of your annual budget will reveal the sources of your revenues. If your major source of revenue accounts for more than about 35% of total revenues, you may question whether or not there is sufficient diversification (and protection) for your organization’s well-being. If a single source of revenue counts for the majority of your revenue flow (over 50%) your organization may be at severe risk in the event of some disruption to the source of revenue. Risk may be reduced and economic strength will be gained through economic diversification.

How to achieve strength through improved economic balance? Certainly, continuing to support the elements that are at the center of an organization’s financial strength is obvious. The answer for successful diversification is not simple. And it is not achieved in a single step. Diversification is a continuous, never-ending journey. Perhaps the most successful journey is one that looks to increase the return of other key existing revenue sources, while also looking for new opportunities that are consistent with the mission of the organization. Innovation and entrepreneurial efforts are a key in this regard.

For many non-profit organizations, economic strength through diversification is not easy. No organization can be successful, however, without economic strength. And if a conscious effort for needed diversification isn’t made, economic strength will never be achieved. Is your economic balance where you’d like it to be?

For the full Strategy+Business article: http://www.strategy-business.com/article/00064?pg=0

Make Your Organization’s Culture Work for You

2011-04-18T09:43:00.000-04:00

by Virgil R. Carter

There’s a saying in non-profit organizational leadership that says “culture eats strategy for lunch”! Experienced volunteer and staff leaders of non-profit organizations quickly learn that their organization’s culture is a formidable force. It is so powerful that it can stop logical and needed improvements in their tracks. Culture can perpetuate outmoded and ineffective programs for years. How does a leader deal with organizational culture?

Organizational culture can be defined as those mind-sets, beliefs, values and behaviors that determine “how we see things around here”. Organizational culture is an unspoken, but shared, understanding of the way the organization functions, how individuals fit into the organization, the characteristics of their organizational roles, and how their roles are valued. Culture is a major determinant of roles and performance—individual and organizational.

In an article, “Stop Blaming Your Culture”, in Strategy + Business, authors Jon Katzenbach and Ashley Harshak write, “When a new leader’s strategy puts the culture of a company at risk, the culture will trump the strategy, almost every time”. They point out that when your strategy and culture clash visibly, more likely than not, the culture is trying to tell you something about your own leadership philosophy.

What to do? The authors suggest that there is an effective way to face cultural challenges. Instead of blaming one’s culture, it can be used positively. “View culture as an asset: a source of energy, pride and motivation…Figure out which of the old behaviors embedded in your culture can be applied to accelerate the needed changes”. Look for ways to counterbalance and diminish other elements of the culture that hinder change. Using culture as a positive force will help “initiate, accelerate and sustain truly beneficial change”, with much less conflict, and with positive results, than one might expect.

For the entire S+A article, see http://www.strategy-business.com/article/11108?pg=all

Creating and Utilizing Effective Senior Management Teams

2011-04-11T09:17:00.000-04:00

by Steven H. Davis, CAE, Society of Exploration Geophysicists

Evolving a group of predominantly Type-A personalities into a fully effective team can be a challenging proposition. Through the years, I have garnered my own sense of how that can best be achieved …which I have labeled (for myself) three-part harmony.

Part one is understanding the players. To be sure, the playing field that is the Senior Management Team’s meeting room presents a great opportunity to assess individual team members and group dynamics in general. Then, the chief staff executive needs to proactively act on those assessments.

And when interventions of the mentoring and arbitrational sort prove ineffective, changes in the composition of the Senior Management Team should be considered. The alternative is to sacrifice group synergy and creativity for the sake of maintaining a superior talent who cannot play the team game. That said, my step one in evolving an outstanding Senior Management Team is composing it of the right people.

Part two is putting adequate resources (time and potentially money) into place to grow the group as a team. I have never witnessed a perfect team in action, nor will I ever. Teamwork comes naturally for some, but not for all; this kind of synergy only comes from a constant effort to experience it and replicate it. And, I am convinced, this only happens when the learning process is embraced as an ongoing and forever pursuit.

Carving out time in Senior Management Team meeting agendas to discuss “How Can we be More Effective?” can help. Hiring a consultant to periodically facilitate a team retreat for the purpose of working together and getting everyone on the same strategic page can help. Scheduling team-building programs and activities can help. The key for me has always been to maintain this focus continuously …toward finding new and effective ways in which to strengthen the sense of team. Investing in the team will yield a better team.

Part three is utilizing the Senior Management Team effectively. Meeting weekly for the purpose of getting updates from everyone is certainly helpful, but it is not at all strategic. Using this weekly meeting to get issues and opportunities on the table and explored can be very strategic. And, this level of participating in routine puzzle-solving discussions can be a stimulating and gratifying experience …of the sort that opens creative doors and therefore allows creative needs to be met. This is when teams grow together, and this is when their impact reaches next levels …when they know they can make a greater difference together.

So, my formula for growing a better Senior Management Team is to ensure the right people are on the bus, continually investing in team growth, and utilizing that team effectively.

Three Processes to Align Mission & Money

2011-04-04T09:13:00.001-04:00

by Virgil R. Carter

Does your organization have an annual process to align mission and money? There are at least three interlinked processes that are required. Here’s a brief look at each.

1. Innovation: An annual innovation program, with staff and budget, is a good approach for encouraging and rewarding ideas for new programs, products and services. One approach is to organize the process as an on-going annual grants program, where written proposals are reviewed and approved, if deemed worthy. Care must be taken to carefully spell out program objectives so that it’s clear the program is for new ideas, and not to perpetuate the status quo. Review of proposals must also be carefully based on the program objectives, so as not to simply fund continuation of existing activities.

2. Existing Program Annual Review: Most non-profit organizations allocate all of their available resources (financial and human) in support of annual operations. Thus, without the reduction and/or “sunset” of some annual programs, products and services, there is no capability to add new activities through innovation or any other means. One approach for annual program review is to implement a customer satisfaction review process, using the “voice of the customer” as a basis for gathering and evaluating data as to which programs, products and services are valued by your customers. Goods and services not valued by customers each year are prime candidates for reduction and /or replacement.

3. Annual Program Planning/Budgeting: Finally, with information from the previous two activities, an organization may conduct a rational annual process for the planning and budgeting of activities for the following 1, 2 or 3 year periods. Instead of the annual budgeting cycle leading the process, it logically is the final phase of review and planning for the future. This also helps to reduce status-quo program competition for a larger and larger share of the financial pie every year.

Aligning mission and money is important for a number of reasons. Here are two:

- Non-profit organizations need to keep pace with their critical changing markets;
- In most cases, there are never enough resources for everything, and thus some priorities have to be established.

Thus the old adage is true for many non-profits, “If something new is to be added to the wagon, then something old must be removed.” Are your mission and money aligned?

How to define success?

2011-03-28T09:13:00.000-04:00

By Virgil R. Carter

How does your association define success? Success comes in many flavors. Perhaps the important thing is to identify and implement what works for you. Thereafter communicate, communicate, and communicate.

So, what does your association value most? Is it performance? How about relationships? Perhaps its competencies or credentialing. Each organization is different when it comes to what matters most, not to mention why it matters to us. So, to define success, there has to be agreement on what matters most. The situation, which may change over time, has a lot to do with defining success. For example, an association in a protracted, downward financial spiral, for example, may define success very differently than an association whose growth has been 30% per year for the past five years.

Here are some important success categories, with suggestions how they might be used.

1. Strategy--Does our association have a sustained record of performance to plan over time (successful strategy is not measured in 12-month cycles and someone’s pet agenda for the year)?

2. Voice of the customer—Who are our (right) customers and how do you know if they are satisfied (yes, there may be “wrong” customers)?

3. Financial—Do we have sustained performance over time meeting budget or ending each year with positive variances (no margin, no mission)?

4. Business operations—What is the record of new program development and existing program retirement over the past 5 years (are you still doing what you did 5 years ago)?

5. Learning & growth—What investment do we make on a consistent annual basis for volunteer’s & staff’s learning and growth in their association roles (no investment, no dividends)?

When you have figured out what matters most to your association and how you will measure success, it’s time to think about annual communications planning and the year’s key audiences and messages. Key messages are important for association leaders—volunteers and staff—to focus on, repeat and reinforce. The messages help everyone to understand and stay on the same page.

There are many useful ways to define organizational success. And to communicate effectively about it. When there is consensus about success, your volunteers, staff and external relationships will thank you, knowing what to expect and how to help. How do you measure organizational success?

Crucial Conversations

2011-03-21T12:39:00.001-04:00

By Virgil R. Carter

How are you at crucial conversations? Crucial conversations are those situations in which you are involved with others, in which the outcomes and the relationships are at stake.

Just about every non-profit CEO has been in crucial conversations. I remember one where 16 volunteer and staff leaders came from various parts of the U.S. in an attempt to settle and dispose of disputes between the parent organization and two of the subsidiary component organizations. You know the situation—it’s common in national and global associations. The meeting was important. The situation needed resolution, and all affected parts of the organization needed to move on to other, positive activities.

Fortunately, and due entirely to the positive and constructive leadership of all 16 participants, we succeeded. It wasn’t easy, but it was important and we reached unanimous agreement on all major points. That evening we had a “victory reception and dinner”, complete with a signing of a Proclamation of Achievement and Appreciation by all participants. They say all’s well that ends well, and we made sure we ended very well, indeed.

There’s a great book that helps address crucial conversations. Coincidentally, it’s titled Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking when Stakes are High. Authors are Patterson, Grenny, McMillan and Switzler, published in 2002 by McGraw Hill, and subsequently a New York Times bestseller.

Building from their research on the subject, the authors define these crucial conversations as those that “occur when there is a lot at stake, when emotions are strong, and when opinions differ”. The authors suggest the importance in such situations of having a clear sense of desired results (outcomes) as well as a clear sense of the desired relationships when the crucial conversations are concluded. This is not a situation in which one may want to do ones thinking out loud!

You can Goggle the book notes or buy the book (or both). You may be better prepared for your next crucial conversation. Good luck!

Wrestling with Burnout

2011-03-14T09:09:00.000-04:00

By Virgil R. Carter

As a CEO, and the top leadership interface between your organization’s members, customers and staff, have you experienced burnout? Do you know CEOs who have gone through burnout? It’s no surprise that leaders, with the challenge of being responsible for planning and performance of their organizations, can become victims of burnout. The continuous, never-ending burden of top leadership can wear anyone down.

Are there some ways to reduce or avoid burnout?

A recent Internet article from LeaderPoint notes that while the weight of being in charge can overcome the most successful leaders, burnout is often a function of not delegating and working through others effectively. Harvard Business Review blogger John Baldoni is quoted as stating that the “best way to overcome the drive than made (CEOs) successful in the first place—the relentless pursuit of perfection—is to shift focus from one’s own success to the success of the executive team.”

Here are some suggestions from the article to help avoid burnout:

- Lead through others: Being a CEO widens the scope and increases the magnitude of the results to be achieved. Assign others the significant outcomes so that the CEO is not the bottleneck, consumed with personal problem-solving.

- Knowing everything: No CEO can do everything well. Accepting that no one can possibly know everything allows one to ask more questions, learn more and allows the work to remain with those show should be doing it.

- Enabling others: Motivating others is a challenge. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t. Instead, focus on the work to be done, the desired outcome and assign these to key staff. Big jobs with significant outcomes tend to motivate people.

The bottom line is about getting results, consistently over time. It’s hard to do that without the support and assistance from others. One of the best ways for CEOs to achieve success is to drop their invincibility posture. Successful leadership and successful organizations are not a solo act.

To read the article “Avoid Burnout by Focusing on Your Team”, by John Baldoni, go here:
http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2010/11/avoid_burnout_by_focusing_on_y.html#

So the next “cool thing” is going mobile, right?

2011-03-07T09:26:00.001-05:00

by Mark C. Anderson

You’re ready to build a mobile website, make your annual meeting into a mobile app and start repurposing some publications as mobile content/apps. You want to be at the mobile edge of cool.

Let’s acknowledge that the world is rapidly moving towards consuming content on mobile devices.

• 10 million tablets were sold in 2010

• 60 million tablets will be sold (worldwide) in 2011

• Smartphones are the fastest growing segment of US cell market

First, instead of being caught up in “ready, fire, aim” consider developing a thoughtful mobile strategy to guide your investments of dollars and staff. And to aid you in creating a strategy, gather some information about your members and constituents. If you don’t know the following, it might be a good idea to gather data so you understand your members’ mobile profiles.

• Numbers of your members who have smartphones (broken down into iPhones, Android, Blackberry, Symbian, other).

• What they use their smartphones for (e.g., email, texting, web surfing, travel support,connecting to server databases, connecting to cloud applications, etc.).

• How often they refer to their smartphones on a daily basis.

• How often they upgrade their smartphone and what causes them to upgrade and change.

• Whether they dock and synch their smartphones to a piece of hardware (e.g., laptop) or servers or both.

• What information they receive from your association now that they would like to get on an app designed for smartphones.

• How many have tablets and how many are planning on getting tablets within the next year.

You can’t get all the necessary information through a web-based survey tool, so plan on running some focus groups to understand how your members use and want to use their mobile devices.

When you have that information, you can then begin to make informed, knowledge-based decisions about the kind of information you want to push to mobile devices and when it’s okay to have that information on a mobile website and when you need a native app that runs on a particular platform (e.g., IOS, Android, etc.).

You’ll be able to master the mobile Tsunami if you understand hour your members use mobile devices and how they hope to have information pushed to their mobile devices through apps.

Better Communications: Make A Plan, Stan!

2011-02-28T09:04:00.000-05:00

By Virgil R. Carter

Have you been caught in the communications trap? I have and it’s not pretty. At the annual meeting, a respected past president says into the microphone, “This organization does a crappy job of communicating. I never know what’s going on, except for my annual dues invoice! What should I renew when this organization can’t communicate any better than that?” Does this ring a bell?

Communications are vitally important. The challenge is that most associations have a wide range of audience segments. These segments are interested in some messages (and media) and not others. This is a case of “I want what I want when I want it (the way I want it).” There is no simple, single solution for communications with diverse members and customers. We are not all a size 6, living in one geographical area!

What to do? One useful proactive tool is creation of an annual communications plan. Conceived at the outset of each fiscal year, and modified as may be necessary during the year, the plan contains a small number of high priority messages for the year. For example, the messages might focus on new technical information, strategic priorities, and/or association achievements which improve the value proposition for members and customers.

A communications plan also includes a schedule of key events and appropriate media to reach desired audience segments during the year. Your public relations staff can use the communications plan and schedule as the guide for creating messages, presentations and articles throughout the year for volunteer and staff leaders.

For an annual communications plan to work, it must have the understanding and support of senior volunteer leaders, senior executives and communications staff. These are the folks who will be doing most of the communications during the year. Volunteer and staff leaders must understand that their individual, personal messages are secondary to the consistent presentation of the important messages from the organization each year. This is what makes for better, more effective communications which reaches more and more of your important members and customers.

Reaching your members and customers effectively is aided by repetition. Yes, I said repetition! Repetition enables more audiences to become more aware of and understand important communications. Have you ever wondered why commercials are so repetitive? One-time messages simply don’t have much impact.

If you want to improve your association’s communications, try working with your volunteer and staff leaders to create an annual message plan, and update it every year. It’s one of the surest ways to reach members and customers—even the members who are challenging to reach.

Helping Your Board to Be More Effective - Five keys for high-level governance

2011-02-21T09:08:00.000-05:00

By Virgil R. Carter

Despite the great diversity among non-profit organizations, we all seek effective governance by our boards.

A critical starting point is to recognize what a vital resource time is. Recruiting new board members is challenging because volunteers are concerned about drains on their time. Governing well is critical because a board’s time together is limited. Thus, how you and your board use your time matters.

Boards that are forward-looking, focused on strategy, provide the maximum effective (and enjoyable) leadership when time is limited. Strategic boards spend the majority of their time identifying broadly important outcomes, setting priorities, and monitoring the way the staff and other volunteers implement major initiatives.

Here are five steps volunteers may take for an effective, productive, and rewarding board.

1. Define success. Establish and practice a shared definition of organizational success. No matter how well an organization may perform in any 12-month period, if it can’t perform effectively year in and year out, it can’t really be called a successful organization. Thus, success has a lot to do with consistency and continuity over time.

2. Understand your core assets. Every organization has core assets. Typically they include: 1) knowledge, 2) community, and 3) advocacy. These are the resources for an organization’s accomplishment of its mission. Volunteers and staff must be strategically focused on the welfare of assets that cause members and customers to value the organization.

3. Think the unthinkable. Ours is a rapidly changing world in which we face unprecedented competition. To remain both up-to-date and competitive, focus on and prepare for the unthinkable—both opportunities and threats. Effective boards consider the one thing that would most revolutionize their organization and the one thing that would most jeopardize it. Thereafter, boards focus strategically to realize the opportunity and head off the threat.

4. Set priorities and monitor them. Resources are always finite—there are never enough. So develop strategic priorities and communicate what is truly important. To maintain a strategic perspective, boards must think in terms of what is important, not how to achieve results. The staff and others of the organization’s operational side are the ones to be held responsible for executing the action.

5. Establish a respectful staff partnership. The professional staff of an organization offer important resources—so important that it may be impossible for a board to be truly strategic without them. For example, staff members may have access to knowledge, contacts, and resources that may be unknown to a board. The staff is uniquely positioned to help develop and implement a definition of organizational success that’s built upon consistent performance, year after year.

Effective boards are both enjoyable and productive where it matters most: achieving the organization’s mission.

Responding to Discord in Meetings

2011-02-14T11:11:00.001-05:00

by Steven H. Davis, CAE, Society of Exploration Geophysicists

Recently experienced rough edges in meetings of my senior management team caused me to resurface a document long-ago evolved for the purpose of setting a positive tone for meetings through the adoption of Rules of Conduct and Behavior. This particular document, in its original utilization, proved effective enough in creating a constructive and positive meetings’ environment wherein it was ultimately bridged into utilization with the entire staff and with the elected leadership of the organization.

In this resurfacing, my intent was to use it as a jumping off point toward developing our own senior management team Rules of Conduct and Behavior. Where it will go from here remains to be seen and potentially serves as the substance of a future post.
The original Rules are 10 in number:

I. We will always treat one another with respect.

II. Harsh, demeaning or accusatory language will never enter our discussions.

III. Bad attitudes will be left at the door.

IV. When our opinions differ, we will provide our input constructively and with the
realization that none of us has all of the answers.

V. When we continue to disagree, we will agree to have different opinions and not allow the
conversation to merge into discord.

VI. We will not speak ill of one another to others in their absence.

VII. If we have issues with one another, we will discuss these one-on-one.

VIII. We will embrace the reality that our diversity is what makes us strong.

IX. We will support one another; one for all and all for one will be our guiding maxim.

X. Re decisions made, we will always speak with one voice.

The process in this instance was to put these pre-existing rules on the table for discussion, with the intent of evolving our own set of rules. In my original pursuit of this, I learned that total buy-in was essential, and that this could only be arrived at if we worked together to develop our rules. I also learned that it is a fine line between muting discord in the meeting room and stifling the passion that can help to generate critical thinking. This is something that has to be discussed and an approach agreed to. This has to be managed carefully.
In this current pursuit, initial discussions have gone very well. This next generation of Rules of Conduct and Behavior should be fully fashioned soon. If substantively different from the original, I will share these as well.

Would we be better off being an NFL coach?

2011-02-07T09:24:00.002-05:00

by Pat Gouhin

With the close of another football season I am once again troubled by the inevitable turnover at the highest levels. This past year seems little different than years past and as of early January 2011, 7 NFL head coaches have been terminated with some reports of potentially another 5 coming before all is said and done and the season is officially put to bed. With 32 teams in the league, this leaves us with annual turnover of somewhere between 20% and 40%. Is that good? Is that bad? What could be considered optimal? How do these rates compare to what we see in the chief staff officer ranks of the association community? Certainly the jobs and responsibilities are very different but there are also some similarities as well.

On 6 January the Wall Street Journal published an article titled, “Inside a College-Football Tragicomedy.” It was about a high profile college coach who was fired. There were a couple of paragraphs that struck me as imminently relevant.

“From the inside, I discovered how complicated the game had become, requiring coaches to work 100 hour weeks recruiting, practicing and watching endless hours of film – only to see that 19-year old kid miss the kick. When that happens, the head coach can expect to get thousands of nasty emails and very little sleep.”

The article goes on to portray the typical day of the star player in a very grueling and demanding way and finishes with the following about the rest of the team …”or any of the 124 other players – does any of these things poorly, or not at all, that’s the head coach’s problem. And if any of those failures hit the papers, the talk shows, or the blogs, it’s an even bigger headache.

This beast (reference to the multi-$billion industry and massive college programs) we have created may be bigger and stronger, but the coach’s job security still rests on the kids who weigh 300 pounds and squats twice that, but still can’t grow a respectable mustache.”

Any of this sound familiar? Perhaps we should be analyzing the beast along with the coach?

Now we all accept the inherent responsibilities that come with the job and understand we have to take the good with the bad and rise above the chaff, but is there a more fundamental issue at work here?

Is there a mismatch between the expectations of the stakeholders and the reality of control and influence that can be exerted by any one individual to produce “winning” results year in and year out? If so, are we as association executives living up to our responsibility to communicate the many interdependencies, variables and unforeseen circumstances that influence the illusion of control or are we perpetuating the fallacy? When we truly believe that a coach can win a championship every year and when we aren’t willing to settle for anything less, is it time to examine the fundamentals of the system in which we operate?

A New Approach

2011-01-31T09:03:00.003-05:00

by Virgil Carter, Editor

Welcome to the Plexus Blog! Welcome to a new approach to share and explore important issues in non-profit and public sector leadership.

The purpose of the new blog is to provide an electronic “home” to engage and share in discussions about emerging issues, key ideas and visions, and significant challenges and successes facing organizations, large and small, in the non-profit and public sector. The new approach will offer weekly articles by recognized and respected CEOs and senior staff. Each week a new article will be published by an invited author that will highlight an important issue facing non-profit and public sector organizations.

Registered readers will be able to comment and discuss the articles with the authors and other readers. Over time, we expect the blog to become a “must read” for organizational leaders who are looking to share ideas and experiences as a means of learning with colleagues.

It’s not an exaggeration to say that our goal is to attract conversations about key issues with the best and the brightest in our field!

How will this blog differ from the many others on the Internet? Our blog will focus on original articles by invited authors, and reader discussions, intended to stimulate critical thinking and discussion about many of the emerging issues, major ideas, challenges and successes facing association leaders. We’re interested in what lies ahead—the opportunities for leadership and improvement. Our goal is for the blog to be a repository of issues, ideas and experiences that can be shared with colleagues for the benefit of all.

What can you do to participate? If you have an idea for an article, let me hear from you via email at virgilcarter@comcast.net

If you want to share your thoughts, just register and respond to one of the weekly postings.

Welcome! Your suggestions and ideas are invited. Help us make this new approach valuable to you and your colleagues. Actively join us in this new approach!