This site mirrors blog @cankoklu click to go there.
Showing posts with label management. Show all posts
Showing posts with label management. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

The Right to Management Competence - Linda Hill & Kent Lineback - Harvard Business Review

What good management comprises — what bosses do to make their people productive — isn't really a mystery. We can argue about the exact wording, but the basic elements aren't in doubt. We've summarized them in what we call the "3 Imperatives": Manage yourself, manage your network, manage your team. In writing about these elements, we've described them in terms of what good managers do and what all managers should strive to do. But it's not hard to rephrase them from a direct report's point of view — in effect, a "Direct Reports' Bill of Rights" — as follows.

Every direct report should be able to expect that the boss will:

  • Be Trustworthy. Trust is based on competence and character, and so people can expect the boss (a) will know what to do and how to do it, and (b) will possess fundamental values, standards, interpersonal skills, emotional maturity, and levels of caring that support the work and those doing it.
  • Exercise influence beyond his or her group. Every group works in a web of interdependence within a broader organization and beyond. Success — through, for example, securing needed resources, attention, and cooperation — depends on the boss's ability to exercise influence in that broader context through a network of ongoing, mutually supportive relationships.
  • Create a team of his or her group. A group is a collection of people who work together. A team is a group whose members are mutually committed to pursuit of a clear purpose and the achievement of goals based on that purpose. In a team there is a "we" separate from the individuals involved and the people in that "we" believe they will all succeed or fail together. Why is this important? Because members of a team are more engaged and committed and as a group are more innovative and productive. A competent manager knows how to transform a group into a team — by fostering a compelling purpose, worthwhile goals and clear plans, productive work processes, and a culture of "we."
  • Recognize individuals and support their development. People want to belong and be recognized for themselves. Thus, an effective manager knows individual team members, works with them, supports their development, and recognizes their contributions — all within the context of the team.

View/comment on the original post at blog @cankoklu

Friday, February 18, 2011

A Bias against 'Quirky'? Why Creative People Can Lose Out on Leadership Positions - Knowledge@Wharton

In a paper titled, "Recognizing Creative Leadership: Can Creative Idea Expression Negatively Relate to Perceptions of Leadership Potential?" to be published in the March 2011 issue of the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Mueller and co-authors Jack A. Goncalo of Cornell and Dishan Kamdar of ISB undertook three studies to examine how creative people were viewed by colleagues. The troubling finding: Those individuals who expressed more creative ideas were viewed as having less, not more, leadership potential. The exception, they found, was when people were specifically told to focus on charismatic leaders. In that case, creative types fared better. But the bottom line is that, in most cases, being creative seems to put people at a disadvantage for climbing the corporate ladder. "It is not easy to select creative leaders," says Mueller. "It takes more time and effort to recognize a creative leader than we might have previously thought."

That reality should be of concern to those who sit in corporate boardrooms around the globe. In a recent survey of 1,500 CEOs by IBM's Institute for Business Value, creativity was named the single most important attribute for success in leading a large corporation in the future. That finding is hardly surprising to Mueller. "There is research that shows that those who have their own creative ideas are better leaders," she notes. "Those individuals know how to recognize good ideas, are open to them and know how to get creative ideas through [the organization]. Selecting creative leaders is the critical challenge organizations face."

But understanding the need for creativity within a large company is not the same as actually fostering it. Indeed, Mueller's work shows that those who think outside the box may be penalized for it. In the first study included in the paper, Mueller and her colleagues examined this trend at a division of a large multinational refinery in Central India. A total of 346 employees took part in the study, with 291 of them being evaluated for leadership potential and 55 employees making those evaluations. The raters were asked to fill out questionnaires on these 291 individuals, grading them on both the degree to which they came up with new, useful ideas and the extent to which they were likely to "become an effective leader" and "advance to a leadership position." In analyzing the data, Mueller and her team controlled for the likelihood that some creative types were simply not interested in moving up the management ranks.

Read the rest of the article at: knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu

View/comment on the original post at blog @cankoklu

Thursday, February 17, 2011

Letting Gen Y Lead a Management Makeover - Vineet Nayar - Harvard Business Review

Some of the most interesting themes emerging from the entries so far:

Increasing democratic influence on the appointment of leaders. ("The Organization Structure as Free Market").

Giving people the chance to shape their work and organizations ("Ideas.com"; "The Management Tree"; "Internal bidding for task assignment").

Creating ways to bypass the filters that impede direct communications ("Can your organization handle the truth?" ; "Live Stream Coffee Chat"; "Who's the Boss?").

Correcting the in-built bias towards incrementalism ("Stop incremental change and foster 'Bold Moves'"; "What if customer delight was our only measurement?").

As diverse in scope and ambition as these ideas are, they share a central theme: They describe the business world as the Millennials think it should be. This new generation is driven by the unwillingness to inherit some of the negative features of traditional management; indeed, by a sense of indignation that corporate citizens haven't already demanded better for themselves.

View/comment on the original post at blog @cankoklu

The Organisation Structure as Free Market | Management Innovation eXchange

Summary
Good manager deliver good results while motivating and growing their employees. Bad managers might still deliver good results, but not focus on doing the best for their employees, slowly de-motivating their staff and thus losing performance and ownership. Often, managers are made based on their achievements in other areas than managing people rather than their potential as a leader, with negative implications for the organization and all parties involved.

If employees could choose their own boss, their performance would increase and the organization would be optimized, since those who are most capable at leading people become managers.

We propose a new management system, which introduces a market mechanism to the human resource management. Each employee chooses his/her manager. Each manager gets evaluated based on the result their team delivers and is rewarded with responsibilities, budget, and budget to salaries.

View/comment on the original post at blog @cankoklu

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

Innovation and performance management - BankerVision

Hat tip to Stefan Lindegard who quotes David Nordfors post speaking to the challenges of the corporate innovator:

“When someone tries to innovate within a traditional organization,

few will understand what he/she is doing,

but everybody will understand who is a trouble-maker.

After the innovation has been embraced by the organization,

few will remember who started it,

but everybody will remember who was a trouble-maker.

This is the dilemma encountered by many intrapreneurs -

they risk punishment for success.”

If you accept the above - and it's really hard not to if you've ever tried to drive innovation in a large organisation - it is possible to conclude that if noone remembers you as a troublemaker, then you haven't been innovating. 

And what follows is innovators will rarely, if ever, fit well with a traditional performance management system. 

View/comment on the original post at blog @cankoklu

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

How a foosball table can kill your startup – part two

  1. If we tracked the usage of Guitar Hero setups, foosball tables, pinball machines, etc., we would see that utilization of them is not really worth their cost and the rent we pay for the space they take up.
  2. Often the toy/activity choice we make is driven by what we personally like. I highly doubt anyone actually thinks about how employees from other demographic groups perceive them. Therefore, we unconsciously create an environment of discrimination.
  3. Innovation happens outside of the walls of our offices. Encourage your employees to get outside and network with their customers and spend more time with their families.
  4. Employees are not stupid! We may be able to attract them with these “benefits”, but the novelty wears off quickly. The deeper we can tap into satisfying the needs of our employees, the more likely they will stay with us. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is often ignored at our own peril.

View/comment on the original post at blog @cankoklu

Monday, October 4, 2010

Rework by Jason Fried and David Heinemeier Hansson - Excerpts

Seth's Blog: Demonstrating strength

Apologize

Defer to others

Avoid shortcuts

Tell the truth

Offer kindness

Seek alliances

Volunteer to take the short straw

Choose the long-term, sacrificing the short

Demonstrate respect to all, not just the obviously strong

Share credit and be public in your gratitude

Risking the appearance of weakness takes strength. And the market knows it.

View/comment on the original post at blog.cankoklu

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

6 Tips for Building a More Creative Company | MarketingProfs Daily Fix Blog

  1. Recognize and reward change makers. Let it be known that it literally pays to make a difference.
  2. Allow mistakes. Build awareness and encourage learning from mistakes. Making mistakes means you’re learning faster.
  3. Be assumption intolerant. Just because something is the way it is, does it mean it has to be that way?
  4. Admit when something is broken, and do something about it.  “It has always been done that way” isn’t justification for broken.
  5. Allow constructive critique of any part of the business. At the same time, encourage solution suggestions, not just pointing-out the problem.
  6. Encourage mingling between departments. We learn best practices from others as well as understand the bigger picture of how different gears of the company fit together.

View/comment on the original post at blog.cankoklu

Monday, September 6, 2010

IT in the Age of the Empowered Employee - Ted Schadler - The Conversation - Harvard Business Review

Incremental innovation and process improvements have always come from those closest to the problem. It's the basis of kaizen, a system where employees continually improve manufacturing processes. It's also a founding principle of Six Sigma — tap employees' relentless, incremental quality improvements.

The same is true in the way employees are harnessing consumer technologies — social, mobile, video, and cloud. They're improving how they do their jobs and solving your customer and business problems. And it's not just a few employees; it's a critical mass of employees. In a survey of more than 4,000 U.S. information workers, we found that 37% are using do-it-yourself technologies without IT's permission. LinkedIn, Google Docs, Smartsheet.com, Facebook, iPads, YouTube, Dropbox, Flipboard — the list is long and growing. Many of these scenarios are do-it-yourself projects.

Read the rest of the article at:blogs.hbr.org

View/comment on the original post at blog.cankoklu

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

10 Tips for Creating Distinct-but-Linked Innovation Groups - Vijay Govindarajan - Harvard Business Review

Here are ten tips to nurture a strong partnership between innovators and the core business:

  1. Articulate a motivating vision of victory in which both the dedicated team and the performance engine win.
  2. Highlight the reality that the dedicated team and the performance engine are mutually dependent.
  3. Create a common enemy: the competition.
  4. Reinforce the values that the dedicated team and the performance engine share, even if they are simple and universal values, like a commitment to integrity.
  5. Make the division of responsibilities between the dedicated team and the performance engine as clear as possible.
  6. Anticipate resource constraints created when the shared staff must simultaneously handle the demands of innovation and ongoing operations.
  7. Gather data to understand whether fears about cannibalization are valid or unfounded.
  8. Alter incentives. Specifically evaluate "ability to collaborate across organizational boundaries" on performance reviews.
  9. Use influential and collaborative insiders at points of interaction between the dedicated team and the shared staff.
  10. When the innovation initiative succeeds, share credit liberally, with both the dedicated team and the shared staff.

View/comment on the original post at blog.cankoklu

Does Better Judgment Come With Age? - Tom Davenport - Harvard Business Review

The executive or manager who relies too much on a single or small group of advisors ignores the wider diversity of opinion that can shape a better decision. This is particularly true considering the "echo-chamber effect" we have all seen some leaders fall prey to, where advisors are (however unconsciously) selected and endorsed because they already share the same worldview and are likely to go along with the gut reactions of the man or woman holding the power. If the advice put forward has the additional sheen of elder year experience, it may be all the more possible to believe that the "second opinion" is in fact an authoritative reinforcement of what was already decided.

Beware the wise elder. It's not that he or she can't offer good advice. It's just that such experience can sometimes become a false and dangerous substitute for the breadth and diversity of opinion, combined with analytical rigor and shared problem-solving, that together make for great organizational judgment.

View/comment on the original post at blog.cankoklu