On Leadership

The Profile of Success: Building High Performing Virtual Teams

Although many companies have made significant investments in virtual teams and the technology to support them, a surprising number of these teams do not reach their full potential.  A recent study conducted by OnPoint Consulting, and described in more detail in Virtual Team Success: A Practical Guide to Working and Leading From a Distance, surveyed 48 virtual teams across industries to identify specific practices associated with the most successful teams.

Eleven Virtual Team Success Factors

What is the profile of high performing virtual teams?  The factors that differentiate top virtual teams and recommendations for organizations that want to enhance the performance of their virtual teams are outlined below.

• Stable and consistent team membership. Less frequent changes in team membership provide greater stability and more time for members to focus on building lasting relationships.     
• Fewer team members. Teams that were less effective were disproportionately larger.
• Members are from the same function.  Cross-functional teams appear to face unique challenges and greater levels of complexity that inhibit performance in a virtual environment.
• Members are on fewer teams.  A greater number of team members on low performing teams reported participating on too many virtual teams, which hindered their overall effectiveness.
• Members have longer tenure.  Teams with more than three years tenure performed better, which suggests that they have had time to improve their communication and execution practices.  
• Face-to-face kick off meeting.  Teams who held an initial face-to-face meeting within the first 90 days achieved better performance than those who never met face-to-face.
• More frequent meetings. Sixty-three percent of high performing teams “met” at least once a week, compared to 29% of the less effective teams. 
• Leverage technology. Members of higher performing teams were more likely to report that they had the proper technology to facilitate working together.  Higher performing teams also used video conferencing more often.
• Provide skill training.  Teams who had more than four development sessions performed significantly better than those who had one or fewer sessions.
• Team leaders who are better able to lead from a distance.  Leaders of high performing teams appear to struggle less with building collaboration virtually, which was a key challenge reported by the lower performing team leaders. 
• Have more members reporting directly to the team leader. Direct reporting relationships with their team members facilitates communication, increases the likelihood of team members having shared goals and clear roles, and enhances the ability of the leader to follow through and hold people accountable. 

 Implications for Building High Performing Virtual Teams

There are five key actions organizations can take to enhance the performance of their virtual teams.

ORGANIZATIONS

• Ensure the right fit of skill to task when selecting virtual team leaders. The most effective virtual team leaders are able to balance the execution-oriented, interpersonal practices, and the cultural factors that are prevalent in virtual teaming.  Organizations should select team leaders based on the characteristics required to manage from a distance and periodically assess their effectiveness.

 

• Don’t take the team launch for granted—set teams up for success.  Organizations need to be thoughtful about team membership, team size, and ensure that teams have the appropriate resources to work together virtually.  For example, use criteria for virtual team member selection and consider who needs to be on the team to make high quality decisions and ensure buy-in.  If the team size becomes too large, have sub-teams work on specific issues and report back to the larger team.  When possible, conduct a face-to-face start-up meeting to discuss team purpose and goals, individual roles, learn more about each other, develop team norms, plan a communication strategy, and conduct team development activities.

 

• Develop reward strategies.  Organizations should implement programs that reward and recognize virtual teams for their collective performance (e.g., “spotlight” team members or celebrate successes virtually as a team).

 

• Foster accountability.  Team leaders and members should incorporate one or more virtual team responsibilities into their goals or personal development plan.  

 

• Assess team progress.  Regularly review virtual team communication and work processes to assess what things are working well and what might be improved.  Periodically collect feedback from stakeholders to assess the team’s performance, identify barriers to high performance, and steps to overcome these barriers. 

It’s important to remember that the factors that contribute to the success of a virtual team are not the same as those for a co-located team.  Organizations that incorporate the eleven success factors when forming virtual teams and follow the five recommendations for their ongoing development will find that their investment will pay off handsomely.

 

 

 

 

Developing Future Leaders At All Levels: What Does Good Look Like?

It is generally accepted that a lack of focus on cultivating future leaders negatively impacts organizational performance.  The findings of OnPoint’s 2011 Execution Gap Survey support that view.  The study found that implementing succession management programs and leadership development programs is strongly correlated with job satisfaction, employee engagement/retention, and effective strategy execution, which are all key predictors of organizational success. 

Firms with a more strategic focus continue to invest in succession and leadership development despite changes in the economic or competitive environment.  As such, they are well-positioned to address planned and unplanned leadership changes.  To support this effort, an organization needs to understand which competencies make a difference in a leader’s effectiveness and the extent to which this varies by level.  To help answer these questions, OnPoint Consulting, in partnership with the American Management Association, collected data on the managerial effectiveness of 622 managers across organizations including government agencies, non-profits, multi-nationals, Fortune 500, and Fortune 1000 organizations.

Four key findings about the competencies that drive leader effectiveness came out of our study:

1. Exceptional managers, regardless of level, demonstrate competence in four key areas.

Our study found that Action Orientation, Building Teams, Building Trust & Personal Accountability, and Critical & Analytical Thinking differentiate top performers at all three levels: first-line manager, manager of managers, and functional manager. 

Implications for Talent Management—Because these competencies appear to be essential for top performance at higher levels as well as for managers of individual contributors, both formal and on-the-job training that help develop these competencies should be targeted to first-line managers to ensure they develop these skills early in their careers.  Allocating resources to this area will help build a strong pipeline of internal managers who are prepared to make the transitions to the next level of management and take on additional responsibility.

2. In addition to the four core competencies mentioned above, it is important to master specific competencies that are critical for success at each level.

In addition to the four core competencies described above, exceptional managers master specific competencies required for success at their level.  We found that exceptional managers received substantially higher ratings than average performers in the following key areas:

• First-line managers: Self Development and Resilience & Stress Tolerance
• Managers of managers: Influencing, Interpersonal Savvy, Creative Thinking, Emotional Intelligence, and Strategic Planning
• Functional managers: Action Orientation, Customer Focus, and Managing Conflict 

Implications for Talent Management—These findings provide guidance for making selection decisions and for the timing and content of training and development.  For example, since the most successful first-line managers are learners and have a high tolerance for stress, organizations should assess leaders for these competencies as part of the selection process.  On the job support for developing these competencies would also be important.  In addition, preparing people to take a broader organizational perspective and building strong interpersonal skills before they are promoted to a manager of managers role would increase the probability of success in that position.

3. The ability to effectively execute plans and initiatives is the hallmark of an exceptional manager.

The managers in our study who were considered exceptional received higher ratings in the areas related to execution and getting things done: Action Orientation, Problem Solving, Decision Making, and Results Orientation.  Competence in these areas appears to set the best apart from the rest.

Implications for Talent Management—Most organizations understand the need to develop an exciting vision and a realistic strategy.  The key issue for organizations today is fulfilling the promise of that vision.  In a recent OnPoint survey, 49% of respondents reported a gap between their organization’s ability to formulate a vision and strategy and deliver business results.  Sixty-four percent of those people lack confidence in their organization’s ability to close the gap.  Ensuring managers have the skills required to deliver consistent results and get things done day-to-day should be a top focus of an organization’s management development activities.

4. Practice is required to build competence and expertise—managers don’t need to be born with it.

Our study suggests that managers who are in a position for five to ten or more years are more likely to be seen as exceptional.  Exceptional managers gain competence and enhance their performance over time, while the average managers reach a performance plateau.  This supports the idea that expertise and effectiveness are the result of experience and practice. 

Implications for Talent Management—Moving managers to the next assignment too quickly does not provide enough time for them to learn from the experience.  Managers need to see the impact of their actions to truly develop competence.  In addition, expertise results when managers are required to tackle problems and situations they have not faced before and that take them out of their comfort zone.  This finding emphasizes the importance of providing on-the-job learning opportunities such as action learning projects where leaders work on solving real business problems. 

 

                                                

How Great Leaders and Their Companies Get Results Every Time

If an organization cannot effectively execute, nothing else matters.  Despite the importance of execution to business success, OnPoint Consulting’s Annual Pulse Survey found that 37% of leaders believe there is a gap between their organization’s ability to develop a strategy and its ability to execute that strategy.   And, even more surprising, 62% lack confidence that the gap can be closed.  

So, what can organizations do to help close the strategy execution gap?   OnPoint’s survey found that the consistent and effective use of three leader behaviors helps predict an organization’s ability to execute initiatives:

1. Facilitate change readiness.  Managing change, especially during a business climate where there’s ambiguity and tremendous change, is essential.    Surprisingly, 41% of leaders indicated that their organizations don’t have a good track record of managing change.  What can organizations learn about the effective change management? Top performing companies are more effective at seven practices that are critical to successful change:

• Providing frequent updates
• Sharing accurate and honest information
• Providing opportunities for employees to express their opinions
• Involving middle managers and keeping them engaged
• Making sure management actions are consistent with the objectives of the change initiative
• Identifying obstacles to implementation and actions to address these obstacles
• Ensuring that adequate resources are available
• Aligning the performance management system with the change

The best companies understand that the direct interaction of a manager and his or her direct reports is important for successful change and that this interaction focuses on practical fundamental management activities.

2. Recognize the contributions of others.  Employee recognition is a fundamental management practice, but apparently, many leaders are neglecting the basics.  Almost a third of leaders in OnPoint’s study reported that their contributions are not being recognized.

Although it’s a simple act, providing recognition for a job well done has a powerful effect on people’s performance.  It reinforces good work and shapes future behavior.  It motivates, builds trust and builds confidence.  When leaders provide recognition, they are sending two important messages.  First, they help the person understand what “good” looks like.  The message is, “This is what it looks like when it’s done well, so keep on doing it.”  The second message is, “You can do this.”  Recognizing calls the person’s attention to the fact that he/she has accomplished something important or made meaningful progress.

3. Enhance the quality of decisions.   Thirty-five percent of leaders said that careful thought does not go into the decision-making process in their organizations. Effective execution and the delivery of consistent results depend on getting the right people talking about the right things at the right time.  But that’s only part of the equation. Leaders also need to increase the likelihood that the “right people” are using good judgment and making sound decisions.

There are three things leaders can do to improve the quality of the decisions they and their people make:

• Make sure that people closest to the action are making the decisions.  This can require a change in organizational structure and, when this is not possible, empower people and hold them accountable for taking initiative to address issues. 
• Involve the right people in decisions. This helps ensure that leaders include perspectives and experiences other than their own and also helps fill in relevant information.
• Use an objective systematic process so that emotion or bias does not cloud the issues or that people do not simply default to the kinds of decisions they have made in the past. 

We’re living in unforgiving times.  Execution has always been important, but when margins (and the margin for error) are paper thin, it becomes even more critical.  Execution is challenging and requires constant attention. However, if leaders focus on these three elements, organizations will soon see improvement in their ability to execute plans.   

Five Ingredients For Virtual Success

"Globally linked virtual teams will transform every government and company in the world.  Any of our peers who don’t do it won’t survive."

-John Chambers, CEO, Cisco

Rising travel costs, coupled with the global dispersion of talent, are just some of the reasons that organizations have migrated toward telecommuting and virtual work.  While numerous organizations have made significant investments in virtual teams and the technology to support them, a surprising number of virtual teams are not reaching their full potential. 

OnPoint Consulting surveyed 48 virtual teams across industries and found that there are specific practices associated with successful virtual teams.  We were surprised to find that many of the virtual teams in our study struggled with fundamental issues such as not having clear roles and responsibilities or not having a shared process for decision making.  

What makes top performing virtual teams successful?  Our research identified five key ingredients for optimal virtual team performance:

Trust one another to get things done.  Trust is a top factor for virtual team success but task-based trust (a belief that team members will do their job) is especially difficult to develop when interactions among team members are infrequent and difficult to arrange.  Trust builds when people follow through on commitments and hold one another accountable for results.

Processes for communicating, decision making and problem solving.   Communication challenges are more pronounced in a virtual setting, especially when there is a lack of face-to-face contact and time zone barriers.  However, high performing virtual teams find ways overcome these challenges. Effective team leaders ensure that communication processes are established early on and revisited over time.  In addition, low performing virtual teams did not establish processes to facilitate problem solving and decision making.  

Leveraging others to get work done.   Successful virtual teams have figured out how to effectively collaborate from a distance.  For example. they involve team members and help one another achieve team goals rather than independently executing tasks and objectives.  If organizations invest time and resources in virtual teams, then it is important to capitalize on this and ensure that team members understand how to work together to achieve their goals.  Successful teams develop operating guidelines to help structure team communication.

Understand how their work aligns with the strategy of their organization. High performing virtual teams are clear about how their work contributes to the success of the organization. This is extremely important in a virtual environment where team members may feel isolated and it is common for team members to become disengaged.

Demonstrate a high level of initiative. Members of high performing teams are more proactive and engaged, and they demonstrate higher levels of initiative.  One way to do this is by creating a team charter to enhance commitment and accountability.  In addition, even though the majority of teams had dedicated team leaders, team members on high performing teams proactively took on leadership responsibilities as required. 

If organizations want to maximize their return on investment, they should ensure that these core practices are in place and continually evaluate the performance of their virtual teams against these factors to assess progress over time.   

 

 

 

No Trust, No Team: Building Trust in a Virtual Setting

OnPoint Consulting’s global study on virtual collaboration found that top performing virtual teams reported higher levels of trust than teams that were less successful, which means that trust is an essential ingredient for virtual team success. 

Despite the importance of trust to virtual collaboration it can take much longer to build trust when working from a distance because team members rarely see one another and, quite often, have never met in person.

While we typically rely on interpersonal trust, which is based on personal relationships, virtual teams must rely more heavily on task-based trust, which is the belief that team members will do their job.  Of course, task-based trust doesn’t happen on its own.  It has to be developed and that occurs when virtual team members are responsive, follow through on commitments, and take responsibility for results. 

The following warning signs to look for to determine whether your virtual team suffers from low levels of trust:

• Team members do not refer to themselves as “we”
• Silos develop among sub-groups
• Lack of information sharing
• Micromanagement by the team leader or team members
• Conflicts are not resolved
• Team members are openly negative
• Team members do not regard the commitments of others as credible
• Low levels of productivity or missed deadlines

So, what can virtual leaders do to build trust?  The following guidelines are a good foundation for success:

• Encourage team members to communicate openly and honestly, model positive behaviors, implement a communication plan for team interactions, and ensure you are accessible and responsive
• Leverage online tools such as videoconferencing, Web-based video, instant messaging, and Facebook-like Web pages with personal profiles and pictures so that team members can become acquainted and learn about each other’s backgrounds and experiences
• Meet face-to-face at least once early on in the team’s formation or use a series of virtual meetings to build relationships and establish credibility
• Encourage spontaneous and informal interaction among team members
• Empower team members to make and act on decisions
• Help people manage conflicts
• Partner team members at different locations and rotate these over time

As virtual teamwork becomes more prevalent, organizations need to take a close look at how they can best ensure the success of these teams. To maximize their return on investment, organizations should ensure that high levels of trust are in place and continually assess the performance of their virtual teams over time.   

 

 

 

Hello, Is Anybody Out There? Facilitating High Impact Virtual Meetings

OnPoint’s global research study on virtual collaboration identified the factors that differentiate high performing virtual teams, or a success profile of “what good looks like”.    One important differentiator was effective virtual meeting management, such that top performing teams have high-quality virtual meetings (v-meetings) and lower performing teams struggle with this.

Unfortunately, one of the biggest trouble spots for leaders is conducting virtual meetings and many leaders have never been trained on best practices for v-meeting management.  We hear stories all the time about marathon v-meetings—some even lasting a day—that quickly lose focus and end up being a waste of everyone’s time. Given that successful virtual meetings are essential to team performance, OnPoint Consulting offers the following tips and guidelines to help virtual leaders better manage v-meetings and improve their performance.

Tip #1: Prepare For the V-Meeting

Build an effective agenda.  In order to make the most of a v-meeting, it is important to outline what will happen before, during, and after the meeting.   First, determine who needs to attend and invite participants, giving them as much advance notice as possible.  At least several days before the meeting, send a meeting reminder with the agenda, any necessary materials, and information on technology that may be used.  

We hear about regularly scheduled v-meetings that are conducted without agendas or clear objectives, but they take place because they are on the calendar.  Poorly run meetings not only waste already scarce time, but they can also jeopardize the team’s ability to meet its deadlines.  This is especially true when people are on multiple virtual teams and need to better manage their time.

The medium matters.  Identify the appropriate technologies to support the meeting’s objectives by considering how much collaboration will be necessary and then determine the appropriate level of “richness.”  For example, email, which is a one-way medium, is generally best for tasks that require little collaboration such as information sharing. When teams need to solve complex problems or make decisions, technology such as videoconferencing or collaborative software tools, such as Hewlett-Packard’s Halo or Cisco’s TelePresence, are best.  Shared web-based conferencing tools like Webex or Gotomeetings have white board functionality that can be used to brainstorm a team’s ideas and polling questions that can be used to periodically solicit feedback and engage team members.  

Address time zone barriers.  One of the most common difficulties is finding a meeting time that works well for all team members, especially for global virtual teams whose members may span multiple time zones. Team members often complain of having to work longer hours—working at 10:00 pm or even getting up at 3:00 am—to accommodate their virtual teammates. Consider rotating the meeting time to accommodate team members in different time zones. 

Tip #2: Keep Virtual Meetings on Track

Minimize tangential discussions. How do top virtual leaders keep everyone on track during the meeting?  They are upfront with the team and tell them that staying on track is everyone’s responsibility. They are well-prepared, which makes the meeting more efficient.  They also use process intervention techniques when necessary to keep the team focused.   An example of this is interrupting a discussion to refocus the participants and/or rebalance group interactions.  While process intervention can be challenging in a virtual setting due to the lack of visual cues, it becomes critical to the success of a meeting.

Reinforce shared responsibility. Team members on high performing virtual teams often take on a facilitation role as needed.  Everyone takes responsibility for keeping the group on track, ensuring that time is well-managed, and that meeting objectives are being met. To reinforce the shared responsibility, have different people lead parts of the session.  If appropriate, rotate the facilitator role among team members.

Tip #3: Balance Tasks and Trust

Top performing virtual teams balance a focus on tasks with attention to building trust and communication which are particularly important for high performance.  

One common challenge on cross-cultural virtual teams is communication and language barriers, which can be a problem when people are not face-to-face.  Some virtual teams start the v-meeting with a “warm up” or informal, non work-related, conversations. These informal conversations help team members transition from their native language and listen to one another get accustomed to accents or unfamiliar pronunciations.  The warm-ups also allow people to get to know each other and help build trust.  

Consider a virtual team that had several members for whom English was a second language.  The team leader asked each team member to share a brief story or update in English at the beginning of each meeting which had positive results. Other virtual teams may use native translators to help clarify key messages and ensure that any cultural nuances are not lost when team members communicate with one another. 

THE BOTTOM LINE

We have witnessed numerous examples where poor meeting management led to virtual team performance issues. The good news is that by following a few simple tips, team leaders can facilitate high-impact virtual meetings and successfully lead from a distance.

 

Working Effectively in a Matrix: Tips for Building and Sustaining Cooperation

In a matrix organization—where people rely on getting work done through others over whom they have no direct authority—maintaining high levels of cooperation and coordination can be a challenge.  The findings of OnPoint’s 2011 Execution Gap study helps clarify the extent to which organizations struggle with this:

• Only 47% responded favorably to the item, “decisions and actions are well coordinated across departments/functions.”
• Only 49% responded favorably to the item, “decisions and actions are well coordinated across levels of management.”
• 40% do not believe that people cooperate across functions and departments to achieve their organization’s strategic objectives.
• 44% do not believe that people in different divisions readily share information, ideas, and best practices.

What can leaders do to encourage and sustain cooperation?  OnPoint’s research indicates that there are three key “cooperation builders” that are critical for success:

1. Improve Communication and Transparency: Two simple actions—not assuming people know what you are thinking and paraphrasing to check for understanding—can go a long way toward making communication transparent and help prevent communication-related missteps. 
2. Agree On When Cooperation Is Needed and What It Looks Like: Although the process of discussing roles and agreeing on “when and how” to work together takes time, it is well worth the investment.  Formally and explicitly working out roles at the early stage of a team’s formation, or whenever a lack of cooperation is noticed, helps preserve trust and enhances productivity.
3. Align Interests and Establish Common Ground: When the objectives of one person or group are at odds with the objectives of another, cooperation suffers. To facilitate alignment, leaders must develop compatible and mutually supportive objectives in a thoughtful and explicit manner.  One approach is to develop a set of broader, collective objectives for a team or work unit, then review the task objectives for specific individuals or groups and ensure that they are consistent with and mutually supportive of the collective objectives. 

While these cooperation builders provide a foundation to encourage collaboration, they won’t eliminate disagreements about what, when, and how to do things.  In order to sustain cooperation and collaboration in a global matrix structure, leaders must gain the support of others for their ideas and constructively resolve differences across organizational boundaries.  Therefore, it is essential for today’s leaders to hone their influence and conflict management skills. 

Leaders who focus on these areas will have much greater success in creating a culture of cooperation and achieving their business objectives in today’s matrix organizations. 

Developing Talent on a Shoestring: Five Strategies to Cultivate Future Leaders In Tough Times

Recent news headlines point to numerous shake-ups in corporate leadership.  Gap, Google, and Pfizer are just a few examples of companies with recent changes to senior leadership and many others are expected.  While some companies continue to allocate time and resources to grooming leaders for additional responsibility, those that reduced their commitment to leadership development during uncertain economic times will be much less prepared to identify successors for key positions and, as a result, may face a talent gap.

It is generally accepted that a lack of consistent focus on cultivating future leaders negatively impacts organizational performance.  The findings of OnPoint’s 2011 Execution Gap Survey support that view.  The study found that implementing succession management programs and offering leadership development programs is strongly correlated with job satisfaction, employee engagement/retention, and effective strategy execution, which are all key predictors of organizational success.  Specifically, the study found:

• 46% of 935 leaders surveyed indicated that their companies did not have a  program in place to fill key management positions
• 35% responded that their companies do not use training to enhance leaders’ skills

Firms with a more strategic focus continue to invest in succession and leadership development rather than simply cutting initiatives when budgets are tight.  As such, they are well-positioned to address planned and unplanned leadership changes.  Ronald Williams, Chairman and former CEO of Aetna reinforces the strategic importance of developing future leaders: “Are we managing the entire talent pool of the organization to create successor generations of expertise?  We don’t think addressing that is extraordinary; we think it’s essential if we are to be competitive in the long-term.”

It’s critical that organizations maintain their commitment to leadership development and succession management despite tough economic conditions.  But how can organizations do this when budgets are tight and still ensure they are prepared in the event of a leadership shake-up?  Rather than slashing programs, here are five strategies companies can use to maximize their talent management efforts in tough times:

• Focus on competencies that make a difference.  Rather than offer “leadership development 101”, it is more effective to identify the competencies that are most critical to the current and future success of the business, and focus skill development in these key areas.  Internal data (e.g., performance management or 360° data) may be available and can be used to determine the key development areas for most leaders.  For example, if leaders need to successfully operate in a matrix and enhance accountability, then it is beneficial to offer programs that will help leaders build these specific skills.  In addition, if group-level data suggests that leaders are strong in Delivering Results but weaker in Strategic Thinking or Managing Change, this information will help prioritize training needs.  

 

• Take learning and development out of the classroom.  Many organizations are creating activities that provide on-the-job learning opportunities such as cross-functional teams, job rotation and action learning projects where leaders work on solving real business problems.  Recently, Hartford Steam Boiler recognized that there was a need for its senior managers to enhance their level of customer focus and strategic thinking.  The CEO sponsored an action learning project where high potential managers worked in two teams to solve important business issues.  The teams generated high-quality recommendations to address these challenges while gaining knowledge that addressed their top development needs. 

 

• Focus on high potential leaders and critical roles.   When training dollars are scarce, focus on high potential leaders who will be critical to the future success of the organization.  The best practice to high potential identification is to use some form of assessment to provide objective data on these leaders.  In addition, determining what roles are of strategic importance to the company will help ensure there is a talent pipeline for those roles.  While succession for key executive positions is important, it is also beneficial to identify potential gaps in bench strength for other critical roles (e.g., sales management or procurement positions) throughout the organization. 

Investing differentially in talent is a strategic decision that pays off.  Daiichi-Sankyo Inc., the U.S. subsidiary of a global pharmaceutical company, recently implemented a leadership acceleration program to develop future sales leaders is a good example of this.  After identifying high potential employees, these employees participated in ongoing developmental activities to better prepare them for additional responsibility in the future.  Despite the challenging economic environment, this company proactively took steps to prepare leaders for its mission critical roles.

 

• Offer alternative delivery strategies.  Rather than simply reducing the number of leadership development programs offered, use creative ways to ensure leaders receive the necessary training to be successful. Due to travel restrictions and a need to increase efficiency, many organizations offer online training programs or blended learning solutions (a combination of web-based and in-person meetings), which can result in significant savings.  Other organizations leverage internal line managers to facilitate their leadership development programs. 

 

• Measure the impact of leadership development on business performance.   Companies with data that illustrates the return on investment (ROI) of their leadership development initiatives have a powerful business case for talent management.  Senior executives who understand the importance of strategic talent management continue to invest in their leaders.  Therefore, it is important to implement a measurement plan that demonstrates the value of talent management initiatives.  For example, data that shows the link between leadership development and customer satisfaction or other business metrics can be particularly compelling.

 

Although it can be difficult and require a clear vision and strong commitment, companies that continue to invest in succession management and leadership development during tough times are more likely to see the pay off when tough times are a thing of the past.  

People Are Not the Problem: Eight Tips to Effectively Manage Change

Despite the amount of time and money that’s been invested in educating organizations and training leaders in the tools and skills to manage change, results have been uneven at best.  OnPoint Consulting’s annual Execution Gap Survey of 935 leaders found that although the ability to manage change is a key predictor of an organization’s ability to engage employees and effectively execute its strategy, 41% of leaders surveyed believe their organizations do not have a good track record when it comes to managing change.  And, 42% report that senior leaders in their companies do not manage change effectively.

Conventional wisdom points to three reasons why leaders find change is difficult to manage: employees don’t recognize the necessity of change; employees generally fear change and prefer the status quo; and change happens too quickly to be easily accommodated by employees.  However, a previous OnPoint survey on change debunks all three widely accepted beliefs.  It revealed that: 

▪          85% of respondents believe that their organizations must continue to change to grow and win in their respective industries

▪          75% report that they are comfortable with change and 83% believe a person can overcome his or her fears and get on board with a change

▪          41% believe that the pace of change in their organizations is “just right.” 

In other words, the poor track record many organizations have in managing change cannot be attributed to inflexible employees who prefer to maintain the status quo or who don’t believe change is necessary for the continued growth and success of their organizations.  Nor can the difficulties be attributed to the pace of change.

So, what should leaders be doing to ensure change is effectively managed?  OnPoint’s study found eight things effective leaders and organizations do better and more consistently than organizations that struggle with change:

1. Make sure leaders at all levels are involved and aligned right from the start. Don’t just focus on senior leaders.
2. Hold everyone accountable for behaviors that support the change. Don’t allow managers to revert to “old” behaviors or follow a set of “rules” that only apply to them.
3. Continue frequent and honest communication for the duration of the change. Don’t assume that once people are on board they will not reevaluate their commitment periodically.
4. Continue to celebrate successes and communicate the benefits of a change. Don’t take momentum for granted and assume people will maintain high levels of morale and performance over time.
5. Be realistic about what can be accomplished in the time available; set realistic goals and milestones. Don’t overpromise and don’t over commit your resources.
6. Frequently revisit and revise the plan. Don’t put the plan on “automatic pilot”
7. Look for obstacles that may become apparent during implementation. Don’t assume all obstacles and appropriate actions have been identified during the planning stage.
8. Maintain focus on change objectives and expected outcomes. Don’t let “squeaky wheels” or “new” challenges distract your attention or decrease your commitment.

Most leaders would agree that change is ubiquitous and the need to effectively manage change is required if we want to achieve results.  However, another change management process or program is probably not the solution unless leaders also focus on these eight best practices.

 

 

The 2010 Execution Round-Up

It’s that time of year again: time for business owners and senior executives to take stock of the past twelve months. What did 2010 look like for you and your company? Did you struggle to regain your post-recession footing? Were employees engaged and focused? Are financials on track? The questions you could ask during your year-end assessment are endless. But, there’s only one that really matters: Did your company effectively execute its plans and initiatives?

Our research uncovered five characteristics and competencies, which we call “The Five Bridges,” that enable people to traverse the execution gap. It is these bridges that differentiate the companies that are consistently able to get things done from those that aren’t. (the former are called “Gap Closers” and the latter “Gap Makers”—and some well-known examples of each are profiled in my book, Closing the Execution Gap: How Great Leaders and their Companies Get Results)

Of course, time has marched on since the book was written, and plenty of other well-known companies have dropped the execution ball in the meantime (BP in the most spectacular fashion). To help the rest of us learn from what we call the “living laboratory” of real-world companies, we present the following execution gap maker list.

OnPoint Consulting’s 2010 Execution Gap Maker Round-Up…

Execution Gap Maker #1: BP (Need we say more?)

It’s obvious from recent events that BP experienced an enormous execution gap. (More like a chasm, really.) Had the company focused on recognizing and closing that gap, it would have prevented this year’s unprecedented disaster. While the oil spill is a complex and tragic event, the cause can be traced back to BP’s failure to build the critical bridges. Leading up to and after the oil spill BP violated almost all the guidelines of effective execution, including lacking an effective structure and lacking clear accountability. These gaps created another problem for them: In the critical stages following the spill, BP was unable to get input from those who had the knowledge and experience to make the best decisions about how to handle it. What’s more, BP failed to empower people to use their best judgment and take appropriate action. Consider that hours before the explosion the rig crew was arguing about the best way to finish the oil well and move the rig to the next site. A Transocean mechanic testified that he overheard a “company man” telling rig workers “how it’s going to be,” and that although the rig workers felt the plan was too risky, they reluctantly agreed. And just after the explosion, as workers were scrambling for safety, a worker was yelled at by the captain (who worked for the rig’s owner, Transocean) for pressing the distress button without authorization, and when another worker was asked if he had called to shore for help, he said he had not because he did not have permission to do so.

The “BRIDGE” that failed: Employee Involvement in Decision Making…among others.

THE LESSON: In order for any company to execute successfully, the right people have to be involved with the right decisions. BP provides a devastating example of what can happen when this isn’t the case. Obviously, this lesson is even more critical when there is as much at stake as there was in the BP disaster. But really for any company trying to gain footing in a constantly changing business environment and tough economy, empowering the right people to make the right decisions can be the difference between landing that next great customer or account or not.

Execution Gap Maker #2: Nokia

Nokia’s share of the worldwide market for mobile phones continued to slip in 2010. It may surprise you to learn that about five years before Apple introduced the iPhone and three years before it launched an online applications store, Nokia was ready to introduce its own Internet-ready touch screen handset with a large display and had an early design of an online applications store.

So what happened? Why was this once-dominant player unable to execute and maintain its market position? It appears Nokia was not able to coordinate decisions and activities across departments or levels of management. Many innovative ideas became the victims of in-fighting among managers who had competing objectives. Plus, as a result of a lack of cross-organizational coordination and cooperation, Nokia wasn’t able to improve its proprietary operating system, Symbian, which would have allowed it to support a more sophisticated smartphone.

Execution Gap Makers #s 3 and 4: The Federal Drug Administration (FDA) and the Agriculture Department

In August of this year, thousands of consumers became ill after eating eggs that were contaminated with salmonella. The discovery of the contamination resulted in over half a billion eggs being pulled from store shelves. How could something like this, and on this scale, have happened? Much of the blame has been attributed to poor federal oversight,. and the cause appears to be a significant lack of coordination across federal agencies. You see, the responsibility for food safety is split between two agencies: The Agriculture Department is responsible for chickens, the grading of eggs for quality, and regulating liquid eggs that are used in industrial food production. But the FDA oversees the safety of eggs still in their shells. So who inspected the Iowa farms to make sure the eggs were safe for human consumption? It turns out that no one did, it just fell through the cracks. The lack of coordination between these two agencies is one reason why so many consumer advocates believe we suffer from a dysfunctional food safety system.

The “BRIDGE” that failed for Gap Makers #2, 3, and 4: Company-Wide Coordination and Cooperation.

THE LESSON: It’s critical that organizations learn to coordinate and collaborate decisions across organizational boundaries. But doing so requires more than faith and words alone. Shared goals and clearly defined roles provide the foundation upon which cooperation and coordination can be built. In addition, people must be held accountable for results. This requires a combination of direct leader behavior and systems that encourage and reinforce the appropriate behavior among employees.

Execution Gap Maker #5: Johnson & Johnson

It’s been a bad year for J&J. Since 2009 McNeil Consumer Healthcare, the J&J division that makes over-the-counter drugs, has had eight recalls, including popular children’s versions of Tylenol, Motrin, Benadryl, and Zyrtec. Most disturbingly was what has been called the “phantom recall,” in which contractors hired by J&J carried out a scheme to buy every package of Motrin by going store to store without informing the FDA. Poor execution doesn’t happen overnight, it can often be traced back to a pattern of behavior that gradually erodes a company’s ability to deliver consistent high-quality results. At J&J it may go back to 2005 when employees reported a lack of alignment between manager behavior and company values and policies. When one million bottles of St. Joseph aspirin failed a quality test after a sample did not dissolve properly, quality workers who blocked the distribution of the bottles claimed their supervisor ordered them to retest the drugs and then average the scores to get a passing grade. Fortunately, there was not a problem with the batch that was released, but it appears that the misalignment of leader behavior with company values in this situation laid the foundation for poor execution, and a potentially dangerous situation, in the future.

The “BRIDGE” that failed: Alignment Between Leader Actions and Company Values and Priorities.

THE LESSON: Leader behavior must be aligned with company objectives and values. While I admit this phrase has been said so often that it’s become a cliché, companies can’t afford to ignore it. You don’t really understand how important value alignment is or the impact it has on effective execution until you see what happens when it’s not there. That’s why stories like the Johnson & Johnson one are so important. They remind us not to take it for granted or assume it’s a ‘no-brainer.’

Execution Gap Maker #6: Toyota

During 2010 Toyota recalled millions of cars due to a variety of defects. This was an extraordinary number for a company once recognized for the quality of its vehicles. What went wrong? It appears Toyota’s decentralized structure, which served it well for many years, turned into a liability as the company continued to grow and dominate worldwide markets. For example, some of Toyota’s former U.S. senior executives believe that keeping the U.S. operations separated in a functional structure—rather than reporting to a single headquarters—forced each to report back to Japan. This required customer complaints to first make their way through the U.S. operation and then over to Japan where they were reviewed by a special committee—which would then have to communicate back to the U.S. All this had to happen before a recall could be issued.

The “BRIDGE” that failed: A Structure That Supports Execution.

THE LESSON: Make sure you have a structure that supports execution. A good structure enhances accountability, coordination, and communication. Plus, it ensures that decisions are being made as close to the action as possible. Toyota’s structure slowed down decision making and the company’s ability to effectively respond to the recall crisis. The Toyota breakdown also illustrates that the five execution bridges are not permanent. In fact, they are quite fragile. Once you’ve built them, you must keep vigilant watch over them and work hard to maintain them over time. It’s quite possible for a company to have a bridge in place one year, only to discover that over time it has weakened or even crumbled and is no longer able to help your people traverse the gap.

As these stories illustrate, execution is the real bottom line and our constant battle cry. It’s what I push our clients to focus on as they seek to improve organizational performance—and it’s the lens we urge all leaders to look through as they review 2010 and make their “business resolutions” for 2011. Execution is not a single-point event, it’s an ongoing process. But since your ability to execute well and consistently is the very fabric of success, I can think of no better place to focus your time and energy.