PURPOSE & IMPACT

Month: November 2024

Leadership Framework – ‘Leadership House’

I’ve been following leadership frameworks over the years. Leadership frameworks are quite interesting to study because they tend to highlight the critical elements and expert thinking about effective leaders and leadership.

This new framework shared in IMD (Switzerland) seems to reinforce the fundamental elements and bring together nicely (with case examples).
According to the article, Patrick Flesner who developed this ‘Leadership House’ framework, has experiences in top-level sports, roles as a partner in prestigious German law firms, leadership position in a publicly traded company, partner in a venture capital fund and author. Probably, bit of the European context as well.

Selected Notes:
* The Leadership House is built on a solid foundation of trust. Trust provides a strong feeling of safety. In trusting relationships, it’s about the issue, not the person.
* A strong team is the first pillar. It’s about more than hiring the right people and putting them in the right roles.
* Having the right people has two dimensions: the first is functional fit and the second is cultural fit. A strong culture is a competitive advantage and separates the best teams from the rest.
* Purpose and vision are important but almost always intangible. It is vital to clarify what must be done to achieve your company’s vision and turn it into reality. We should invite team members to the goal-setting process and ask them about what they believe must be done to turn purpose and vision into reality. In this way, our team members will become the owners of the goals and do whatever possible to achieve them, which is psychologically very powerful.
* We must ask our teams to translate shared goals into “joint plans”. We must show what each team and its members must do (and, importantly, deliver in terms of results) so we achieve our shared goals. Joint plans are more granular and make execution possible.
* Team members are held accountable for both the tasks and the results they achieve. This is why it is so important that joint plans also show the results to be delivered.
* We can only hold team members accountable if we empower them.
* Without execution, there are no results; without results, there is no effective leadership. Execution is where leadership shifts from theory to practice, yet it’s often where leaders struggle the most. One of the key challenges is finding the right level of involvement – too much oversight risks micromanagement, stifling creativity and independence. Too little involvement leads to confusion and a lack of direction.
* No leader has all the answers, and that’s fine. Leadership isn’t about knowing everything but about creating the conditions for your team to find the answers together. In life and business, outcomes depend on external factors, and, often, a bit of luck. What we can influence and control is building a great team, setting it up for success, and working together toward shared goals.

Source:
I by IMD; The Leadership House: Building solid foundations for leadership and business success; Patrick Flesner; 18 November 2024

Middle Manager Reality Check

Image Source: Robin Higgins, Pixabay

Middle Managers often feel “sandwiched” and frustrated in organizations, especially during changes. Recent studies indicate further reduction in the number of middle managers in organizations.
How do middle managers navigate successfully, manage selves and stay increasingly relevant in a fast changing/evolving world?
Organizations also need to tread cautiously with a longer term perspective and focused work on changing mindset and culture, as they plan changes.

These are selected notes, interesting data from a couple of Korn Ferry articles – Where’d My Manager Go? (LinkedIn), and A World with No Managers? (Korn Ferry website).

* Last year, in a sign of the aggressiveness with which firms are removing them, middle managers represented 31.5% of all layoffs, and an average of 22% between 2018 and 2022.
* And when middle managers depart voluntarily, they are not being replaced, which creates a void in leadership.
“If you cut and cut and cut, but don’t change mindsets, you can accelerate vertical hierarchy,” says Mark Arian, CEO of Korn Ferry Consulting. “You can end up in a bit of a death spiral.”
* In theory, trimming the middle layer can strengthen workflows: Autonomy and decision-making extend downward, and customer responsiveness improves, along with accountability and morale. But “that doesn’t necessarily happen”. In practice, sometimes authority coalesces at top levels, leaving underlings awaiting signals.
* But experts say today’s middle managers are under unprecedented pressure. Half are burned-out. Thirty percent are too stressed to support their teams, according to employees participating in LinkedIn’s Workforce Confidence survey.
* Experts advise firm leaders to proceed with great caution. “When you get rid of middle managers, the margin for error becomes minuscule.”
* Rather than making deep cuts, experts advise piloting studies of new organizational structures.
* Experts advise training teams to be inclusive and knowledgeable about the expertise and leadership of each trainee.

In my observation and personal experiences, during most times after the organizational deep cuts, the vaccum between the top and front line grows leading to major communication gaps and frustration among team members. Top levels of the organizations do not end up having sufficient time to manage the increased demands and need for attention. For those reasons, it is extremely important to work on workforce culture and mindset changes proactively, in order to ensure better readiness. Most times, there is a mad scramble after the quick cuts are implemented. It is also important to think about the inter generational shifts in the workplace and related impacts.

Is Being In HR Getting Tougher?

McKinsey recently shared an interesting discussion regarding how the HR function’s own stress is showing. This is a very relevant and needed discussion because during most times of intense changes, HR members also feel exasperated and in a thankless role (referenced in a recent New York Times article). They feel caught in between, and hit from all sides. Many HR professionals can relate to this discussion, based on their own experiences.

One differentiator for great HR professionals and leaders is that they take the time to reflect, process, learn from the challenges and figure out ways to work through them proactively with a growth mindset. This discussion is valuable food for thinking for not just HR professionals but also for all key stakeholders.

Here are some highlight notes for me from the discussion.

* Research reporting that 35 percent of HR leaders surveyed don’t believe their management team cares about their mental health.
* The HR function lives in the friction between caring for the employee and caring for the organization. 
* Organizations need to understand the importance of partnering with their HR colleagues and engaging them early when they’re thinking about strategic changes. The earlier you engage your HR business partners in those conversations, the better it is for the organization.
* When it comes to capability building, we need to be thoughtful about what we put on HR versus the rest of the enterprise and ensure that people leadership is a joint capability.
* It’s very easy to add things to the portfolio of trainings, surveys, and information gathering. It’s a lot harder to stop doing things. So creating and building that muscle and challenging the status quo is something that every organization needs.
* As an HR leader, I can bring joy if I can be my authentic self with a team that is excited to work with me and views my input as a real contribution. 
* If my day-to-day is going to be more joyful, more energetic, and more fun, then I am working with people I like and respect who like and respect me. And we’re engaging on some cool topics together, making our organization a better place.
* Sometimes HR is the messenger caught in the middle.
* Over time, the administrative side will likely become easier or more automated. However, there is still an unbelievable need for a human element that can translate even self-serve tools to help a colleague in need.
* Trust is hard earned but can go away in a second. And it can go away in a second because of HR but also, unfortunately, because of business leaders. It’s important to be thoughtful in those moments. The unified voice helps build trust, but a little division amplifies quickly across teams and organizations. If leaders understood that impact, they might choose their words differently.
* We also need to build trust within HR. HR has to stick up for HR, too. And everybody has to own the full agenda. We need everybody in HR to speak up. Otherwise, you may build immediate trust but undermine trust in HR as a whole.

Source:
Why being in HR is getting tougher—and how to break through; November 1, 2024; McKinsey & Company







Learning To Deal With Failures In Startups

I came across a very relevant and interesting opinion piece in the Business Standard today, titled “Startup Fever” by Ajit Balakrishnan.

Some important notes from the author that got me thinking:

“…what gives me sleepless nights is that in India, amid all this clapping and cheering abouts startups, at policy making level we need to dive a lot deeper into the startup process…

Statistics from the United States and India show that nine out of ten startups don’t make it; ie. only 10 per cent survive and prosper.
A further analysis shows that 20 per cent of startups fall apart after a year, another 30 per cent close down within two years, 20 per cent shut their doors within five years, and the remaining 20 per cent dissolve within ten years…
Which conveys learning to deal with failure in a startup venture appears to be as important, if not more important, than learning to celebrate success.

…Statistics reveal that the most important reason for failure among startups is that the product/service created does not appeal to the market (market fit).
Second – initial funds startup had at its disposal are used up too quickly.
Third – failing to hire the right people. The founders should complement each other’s skills.
The final reason for failure – something that could happen in the environment beyond your control but damages your business…”


The opinion piece starts with a reference to an individual suicide scenario, potentially of a startup founder.
Our world tends to celebrate only the few startup successes. Is there a way to cherish the learnings and journeys of those that fail?

Startup founders and teams live through constant high stress and pressure. It is critical to work through the challenges together as a team, and build a healthy internal environment that supports each other during times of both success and failures. The impact of leadership mental and physical health could roll over into many areas, including health of the organization. Don’t leave people hanging, and share graciously during success as well. In the larger context and meaning of life, the universe seems to have a way of balancing. There are various aspects of the organization that can be analysed and improved.

External support networks and the systemic support could be game changers for leaders who may feel lonely. Sometimes, for those who have not faced any previous major failure in life, a major failure like this can be debilitating. Finding ways to cherish the journey and experience, relationships, building personal and organizational resilience (including learning to work through failures), and connecting the dots to larger context (seeing it as part of evolution) can add to the meaning of work and life.

This also reminded of a famous quote from Steve Jobs.

You can’t connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future. You have to trust in something—your gut, destiny, life, karma, whatever”.

© 2024 Lead-Wise

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑

Follow by Email
LinkedIn
Share