The Leadership Dilemma
I’m lucky to have worked in a number of different companies, cultures and countries. One quality that effective leaders are meant to have in all of them is that they “walk the talk”.
The British armed forces (and, I’m sure, others as well) have a principle that an officer should never ask those under his or her command to do something that they wouldn’t be prepared to do themselves. Sadly, this attitude is often lacking in the corporate world. The ones at whom people sneer behind their backs are those who use the “do as I say, not as I do” approach.
Is this necessarily wrong? Sometimes, it depends on “culture”. There are cultures where leadership by example is the norm, and others where doing as you’re told is the accepted way of doing things. In the latter case, leaders who “muck in” risk being seen as not important enough or even not trusting enough (otherwise, why would they be doing the work of their “juniors”?).
This may even drive down to businesses. In the same country, you may find one business where the culture says “let’s get this done together” and others where the hierarchy is much more rigidly observed. The same “teamwork” exercise applied to the different cultures will produce very different results.
Is one culture “better” than the other? I recommend judging by results – both the end result and also how people feel during the process of achieving them as well as when they have achieved them. If people feel exploited and un-valued/under-valued, that they haven’t been given the necessary guidance or resources or that they haven’t been given the recognition that they deserve, then the exercise (however they were led) is a failure. The person who influences all this is the leader.
I see a lot in management/leadership literature about “motivation” as if it were a tool that could be taken out of a box and used as needed before being put back in its place until the next time it’s required. My own view is that motivation must be as natural as breathing. We motivate our team members, peers and even bosses with our behaviour and actions every minute of every day.
The problem is that very few of us realise this, and (speaking for myself anyway!) find it difficult to behave consistently in a manner that will do this. There are days when we’ll be “off colour” and people will notice. Then we have to bring other tools out of the management tool box to sort things out.
So back to the beginning: is leading by example “good” or “bad”? In my opinion, behaving as I would expect others to is no bad thing. It sets the tone and standard. If someone gently corrects me, or points out that it’s OK (or, indeed, expected) for me to stand back, then fine. This is even more the case if others can do it better than I can. Great leaders know when to stand back and let those “who know what they’re doing get on with it”.
I have spent more than half my life delivering change in different world markets from the most developed to “emerging” economies. With more than 20 years in the world financial services industry running different service, operations and lending businesses, I started my own Performance Management Consultancy to offer solutions for improving performance, productivity and risk management. I work with individuals, small businesses, charities, quoted companies and academic institutions across the world. An international speaker, trainer, author and fund-raiser, I can be contacted by email . My website provides a full picture of my portfolio of services. For strategic questions that you should be asking yourself, follow me at @wkm610.
Labels: Career, Teamwork
Overburdening With Overprocessing
How many of your processes are REALLY needed?
I remember that in one country in which I worked, customers had to fill out separate forms to:
- Open a current account;
- Apply for an ATM card;
- Apply for a credit card;
- Apply for telephone banking;
- Apply for internet banking.
The result? Staff spent longer than necessary processing five forms, and customers got annoyed with having to provide the same information 5 times over as well as having to wait longer to be served. costs were all higher thanks to the longer time spent processing so many forms.
In the end, staff asked the customer to complete the first form, sign the others “blank” and would then complete the latter at the end of the working day. This still didn't really solve the problem of the unnecessary extra time required to fill in forms.
Then one day, someone had a brainwave: why not combine all the forms into one? Customers would have to provide information only once, and then just tick boxes for the services they required. Once legal had approved the form, thinks changed:
- Queues shortened
- Time spent filling forms was shorter;
- We needed less storage space for all those extra forms;
- Staff were happier;
- Customers were happier;
- Costs went down.
The amount of waste that we eliminated was significant. I didn’t fully appreciate it at the time, but we were wasting:
- Space;
- Time;
- Customer goodwill;
- Staff goodwill;
- Money;
- Reputation.
Many overly-burdensome processes usually result from people “bolting on” extras because in the dim and distant past something went wrong. Instead of fixing the root cause of the problem, they tackle the symptons. In the case of the bank, as new products were developed, each had its own application form and terms and conditions, and the molehill became a bureaucratic mountain.
What could you do to improve things? Several things:
- Identify the processes that bring in the cash;
- Map (describe in pictures) every step in the processes above;
- Review every step – is it necessary in terms of bringing in the cash faster?
- Eliminate or change the steps that don’t help bring in the cash faster;
- Test the revised process – does it work?
- If so, implement it.
Today, training, technology and talent are better and generally more available, and will continue to improve/grow. A process should contain only as many steps as are absolutely essential to produce a product/service, deliver it to the customer and receive payment. Yes, there may be special legal or regulatory requirements that you must observe, but make sure that these add as little extra time to the process as possible.
I have spent more than half my life delivering change in different world markets from the most developed to “emerging” economies. With more than 20 years in the world financial services industry running different service, operations and lending businesses, I started my own Performance Management Consultancy to offer solutions for improving performance, productivity and risk management. I work with individuals, small businesses, charities, quoted companies and academic institutions across the world. An international speaker, trainer, author and fund-raiser, I can be contacted by email . My website provides a full picture of my portfolio of services. For strategic questions that you should be asking yourself, follow me at @wkm610.
Labels: Customer Care, Financial, Productivity
Could Your Troublemakers Be The Answers To Your Problems?
The “halo effect” is a wonderful thing. “Give a dog a bad name and hang him.” the
proverb goes. How often do management
(with the compliance of a cowardly and compliant HR department) label someone
as a “problem” because they usually:
Have a better idea?
- Disagree with what “the boss” says?
- Point out the faults in the organisation’s processes,
systems and procedures?
- Seem to be constantly swimming against the tide of “received
corporate wisdom”?
Labeling someone as a “troublemaker” – and telling them
about it – is an easy way to put them in their place. After all, most people want to be thought of
as “good corporate employees” and “team workers”. These are values that society and organisations
drum into us from day one. “Don’t rock
the boat”, “Don’t stick your neck out”, “Don’t make waves” tend to be the
oft-repeated phrases in appraisals, water-cooler conversations and the
like.
As a result, leadership becomes complacent, stops learning
and even over-invests in the status quo.
They may let themselves off too often or too easily when things go wrong.
How do “troublemakers” benefit an organisation? I see a number of ways:
Challenge:
Challenge and striving are good for us both mentally and
physically. They’re also good for our
customers, staff and shareholders. Look
at what happened to any number of large organisations that ultimately failed
because of the “hubris” of their leaders (Lehman Bros, RBS, Northern
Rock). No one dared to challenge their
force of personality, and the results were disastrous.
Learning:
A troublemaker might actually be pointing out a learning
experience; something new that’s happening in the market or internally. If you miss out on the opportunity, your
business could suffer.
Improvement:
They may be showing the way to do things better. Just because it’s “not invented here” doesn’t
mean that it shouldn’t be taken seriously.
We see too many examples of businesses that became complacent and lost
out (Microsoft, Nokia). The world is
amore competitive place, and businesses need to be able to spot trends and
react fast.
Foresight:
Different people process information in different ways. Some can spot trends or patterns faster than
others. Although what they say may not
be welcome as it will “cost too much” to implement and “none of the competitors
are doing it”, it doesn’t mean it isn’t valid.
If you constantly wait until the competition does it, you’re already
playing “catch-up” as opposed to “changing the game” and making others follow.
Some people may indeed be genuine troublemakers if all they
do is cause disruption, dissension and demotivation, but before dismissing them
out of hand, check to see if there’s substance to what they’re doing or saying.
One way of seeing if they have a point is to allow them
their head. Of course this is “risky”,
but if you establish clear guidelines on what you expect, their limits of
authority, key project review points, results expected and consequences for
non-achievement, you can minimise this.
Equally, you will then find out if you have a valuable but maligned
resource on your hands or a true “problem child” who needs help.
I have spent more than half my
life delivering change in different world markets from the most developed to
“emerging” economies. With more than 20 years in the world financial services
industry running different service, operations and lending businesses, I
started my own Performance Management Consultancy to offer solutions for
improving performance, productivity and risk management. I work with individuals, small businesses,
charities, quoted companies and academic institutions across the world. An international
speaker, trainer, author and fund-raiser, I can be contacted by email . My website provides a full picture of my portfolio of
services. For strategic questions that
you should be asking yourself, follow me at @wkm610.
Labels: Career, Productivity, Strategy, Teamwork
