THREE MOST RECENT BLOGS SUMMARISED
“Non-Executive Directors should question organisational structures.
How quickly are your international thoroughbreds heading towards the knackers yard and what are your NEDS doing about it?”
http://anexecutiveview.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/non-executive-directors-should-question.html
“Good Facilitation.
You know it when you see it and you definitely feel it when it is missing.”
http://anexecutiveview.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/good-facilitation.html
“Is The Quality of HR Senior Leadership in Decline?
The function has not been seen to address governance issues in high profile corporate failures.”
http://anexecutiveview.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/is-quality-of-hr-senior-leadership-in.html
MOST POPULAR BLOG REVISITED
“Process excellence includes keeping your competitors guessing and your board aware.”
This blog continues to attract new readers
http://anexecutiveview.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/process-excellence-includes-keeping.html
WHAT’S NEW
I recently completed the latest of three consecutive assignments for Pyramid ODI in an American owned multinational - three different European countries, three very different projects and three very different outcomes.
My pro-bono mentoring work continues in the background, with a major development for one of my clients – congrats, but still some way to go.
My second term as chair of the governance and nominations committee on the International Alumni Council at London Business School has ended. It was a real privilege to transition this body from a partially elected board to a fully nominated Council.
WHAT’S NEXT
A business development trip to Belgium and a Business networking event at CPFC
http://www.cpfc.co.uk/page/CPFCBusinessClub/0,,10323,00.html ,
LBS reunion weekend & Global Leadership Summit to look forward to
http://bsr.london.edu/home/index.html
and my next assignment, of course.
I hope your business and life are going well and you feel as positive as I do about the future.
Best wishes,
Michael
Mobile: +44 (0) 7768 391 000 Salmon Heaton & Kimmins Ltd, in association with Pyramid ODI
You have received a copy of this monthly newsletter as a valued contact, but if you do not wish to receive future updates then please send an email titled "unsubscribe" to info@shkltd.com
Tuesday, 17 April 2012
Thursday, 12 April 2012
Non-Executive Directors should question organisational structures.
This is not meddling with executive responsibility. Structures that give managers too wide a span of control create risk and this falls under a NED’s governance responsibility. Remuneration Committees need to ensure that they are not paying more to fewer executives, within flawed structures that are bound for future failure.
How quickly are your international thoroughbreds heading towards the knackers yard and what are your NEDS doing about it?
As costs rise and margins fall, many multinationals are cutting the number of mid-level executives; removing general managers and replacing them with remote, functionally-based organisations - matrix structures without local oversight. The remaining executives inherit a growing number of direct and indirect reports, increasing their supervisory workload regardless of time-zone and culture. Knowledge and complexity of diverse markets and technologies do not seem to matter. Performance is increasingly measured through automated dashboards and brief update calls.
Can you imagine what it is like for someone with 16 direct reports spread across the globe? More importantly, can you imagine what it is like for the 16 subordinates? Yes, they are all experienced professionals who enjoy considerable “freedom to act”, but at what point does supervisory support and governance responsibility start to suffer?
In organisational design and Hay job evaluation, 5 to 8 reports used to be the norm. The number tended to be lower when there was real functional diversity and higher when the roles were significantly similar. The “span of control” was higher for a General Manager than a Regional Sales Director, so it was not unusual for the latter to have more direct reports.
When results are exceeding expectations and delegation is running smoothly then all is well, but in recession and difficult markets, performance can be hard to sustain over the long term. The pressure builds as results fail to meet targets. Executives should now be monitoring their team more closely, but they do not have the bandwidth.
Both parties “buy time” with international calls in the middle of the night – broadcasting information rather than sharing critical factors for success. Over time, this supersedes vital coaching, mentoring and sharing of experience.
NEDs should ask their remuneration and audit committees to question the human and financial risks associated with these international matrix structures.
How quickly are your international thoroughbreds heading towards the knackers yard and what are your NEDS doing about it?
As costs rise and margins fall, many multinationals are cutting the number of mid-level executives; removing general managers and replacing them with remote, functionally-based organisations - matrix structures without local oversight. The remaining executives inherit a growing number of direct and indirect reports, increasing their supervisory workload regardless of time-zone and culture. Knowledge and complexity of diverse markets and technologies do not seem to matter. Performance is increasingly measured through automated dashboards and brief update calls.
Can you imagine what it is like for someone with 16 direct reports spread across the globe? More importantly, can you imagine what it is like for the 16 subordinates? Yes, they are all experienced professionals who enjoy considerable “freedom to act”, but at what point does supervisory support and governance responsibility start to suffer?
In organisational design and Hay job evaluation, 5 to 8 reports used to be the norm. The number tended to be lower when there was real functional diversity and higher when the roles were significantly similar. The “span of control” was higher for a General Manager than a Regional Sales Director, so it was not unusual for the latter to have more direct reports.
When results are exceeding expectations and delegation is running smoothly then all is well, but in recession and difficult markets, performance can be hard to sustain over the long term. The pressure builds as results fail to meet targets. Executives should now be monitoring their team more closely, but they do not have the bandwidth.
Both parties “buy time” with international calls in the middle of the night – broadcasting information rather than sharing critical factors for success. Over time, this supersedes vital coaching, mentoring and sharing of experience.
NEDs should ask their remuneration and audit committees to question the human and financial risks associated with these international matrix structures.
Tuesday, 10 April 2012
Good Facilitation
You know it when you see it and you definitely feel it when it is missing.
I recently attended an event that used an external facilitator. The group are still “reeling” from the effects. His contribution lacked… The meeting lacked … The outcomes lacked… Please let me know if you have had a similar experience in your organisation?
A good facilitator helps a group create an innovative and collaborative experience with clear outcomes. How is this achieved?
PLAN
- Ensure the event chair understands what your role is and is not, relative to their role.
- Agree the agenda, structure and participants well in advance.
- Know the roles, characters and experience of the participants.
DO
- Open well and close on a high – with clear agreement on next steps.
- Handle conflict and emotion constructively; acknowledge open or contentious issues.
- Know when to step in, to manage time effectively.
ACT
- Engage with everyone; use your skill to ensure full participation.
- Maintain a high energy level throughout; use techniques and tools wisely.
- Release your personality; use your experience to avoid being an expert.
You don’t want your next event or meeting to lack effective outcomes or energy. You don’t want to ask a colleague to facilitate and then wonder why it all went wrong. Do you?
Call me now. I am happy to give you some tips on selecting the right person.
I recently attended an event that used an external facilitator. The group are still “reeling” from the effects. His contribution lacked… The meeting lacked … The outcomes lacked… Please let me know if you have had a similar experience in your organisation?
A good facilitator helps a group create an innovative and collaborative experience with clear outcomes. How is this achieved?
PLAN
- Ensure the event chair understands what your role is and is not, relative to their role.
- Agree the agenda, structure and participants well in advance.
- Know the roles, characters and experience of the participants.
DO
- Open well and close on a high – with clear agreement on next steps.
- Handle conflict and emotion constructively; acknowledge open or contentious issues.
- Know when to step in, to manage time effectively.
ACT
- Engage with everyone; use your skill to ensure full participation.
- Maintain a high energy level throughout; use techniques and tools wisely.
- Release your personality; use your experience to avoid being an expert.
You don’t want your next event or meeting to lack effective outcomes or energy. You don’t want to ask a colleague to facilitate and then wonder why it all went wrong. Do you?
Call me now. I am happy to give you some tips on selecting the right person.
Thursday, 5 April 2012
REMPLOY – The future for the disabled and disadvantaged in work
Liz Sayce’s report has given the green light to the UK Government to remove its subsidy to REMPLOY. It has been reported that this will result in the closure of 36 of 54 factories and put 1500 disabled persons out of work.
The subsidy of £25,000 per person per year could be better targeted to schemes encouraging disabled and disadvantaged workers into mainstream employment. Those involved could be better off in the long term. This change could break down prejudice. However, history is not on Liz’s side. It is reported that many of those made redundant when the last government reduced its support are, four years later, still unemployed.
With UK unemployment at more than 2.67m and many businesses facing an uncertain economic future, is this the time to experiment on recruiters?
Did I wake up this morning to a new world of benevolent shareholders who might sacrifice a fraction of a penny of their dividend to ensure workplace adjustments? Will HR officers be pushing at an open door as managers seek to hire ex-REMPLOY staff? Will colleagues support the transition of the disabled into the mainstream market?
There is no perfect time to make any change, but surely Liz Sayce’s new world should be given a chance if the Government helps to keep the factories open until everyone has been re-deployed.
UK Department of Work and Pensions March 2012 report,”Disability employment support: fulfilling potential”
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/dis-employ-support-response.pdf
“It is unacceptable that while many disabled people want to work, too few achieve this ambition, and that the life outcomes of young disabled people and those with special educational needs (SEN) are disproportionately poor.”
Liz Sayce’s Review to Government in June 2011, “Getting in, staying in and getting on”
http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm80/8081/8081.pdf
“developing more equitable ways to:
– ‘get in’ – more disabled people doing apprenticeships, work experience, work placements, and on-the-job learning;
– ‘stay in’ – better promotion of Access to Work for retention; and
– ‘get on’ – whether setting up your own business or mutual, or gaining skills for career development.”
The subsidy of £25,000 per person per year could be better targeted to schemes encouraging disabled and disadvantaged workers into mainstream employment. Those involved could be better off in the long term. This change could break down prejudice. However, history is not on Liz’s side. It is reported that many of those made redundant when the last government reduced its support are, four years later, still unemployed.
With UK unemployment at more than 2.67m and many businesses facing an uncertain economic future, is this the time to experiment on recruiters?
Did I wake up this morning to a new world of benevolent shareholders who might sacrifice a fraction of a penny of their dividend to ensure workplace adjustments? Will HR officers be pushing at an open door as managers seek to hire ex-REMPLOY staff? Will colleagues support the transition of the disabled into the mainstream market?
There is no perfect time to make any change, but surely Liz Sayce’s new world should be given a chance if the Government helps to keep the factories open until everyone has been re-deployed.
UK Department of Work and Pensions March 2012 report,”Disability employment support: fulfilling potential”
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/dis-employ-support-response.pdf
“It is unacceptable that while many disabled people want to work, too few achieve this ambition, and that the life outcomes of young disabled people and those with special educational needs (SEN) are disproportionately poor.”
Liz Sayce’s Review to Government in June 2011, “Getting in, staying in and getting on”
http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm80/8081/8081.pdf
“developing more equitable ways to:
– ‘get in’ – more disabled people doing apprenticeships, work experience, work placements, and on-the-job learning;
– ‘stay in’ – better promotion of Access to Work for retention; and
– ‘get on’ – whether setting up your own business or mutual, or gaining skills for career development.”
Saturday, 24 March 2012
Is The Quality of HR Senior Leadership in Decline?
Neil Roden, ex-RBS, suggests in a PM article that the quality of HR senior leadership is declining. Apart from the factors mentioned in the article, there are several other reasons to support this perception:
HR’s influence on strategy has weakened during the recession. Lay-offs undermine trust and confidence. The function has not been seen to address governance issues in high profile corporate failures. The inability to say “No”, to hold a position under pressure or manage the politics of the boardroom seems diminished.
The media supports this theme. Extra cash for guaranteed attendance during the London 2012 Olympics is interpreted as a failure to plan ahead and negotiate wisely. Inadequate staff numbers in the NHS and education reflects poor HR policy implementation.
Perception is not necessarily reality.
Some HR leaders have a significant impact on the future success of their businesses. They have CEOs who trust their judgement and back their actions especially on “difficult” issues. They demonstrate courage, have superb influencing skills and are visible even during tough times. Critically, they all have corporate OD responsibility.
Perhaps Roden should not be too surprised. Shareholders want board members to demonstrate good governance across the whole business rather than just offering individual functional insight.
HR’s influence on strategy has weakened during the recession. Lay-offs undermine trust and confidence. The function has not been seen to address governance issues in high profile corporate failures. The inability to say “No”, to hold a position under pressure or manage the politics of the boardroom seems diminished.
The media supports this theme. Extra cash for guaranteed attendance during the London 2012 Olympics is interpreted as a failure to plan ahead and negotiate wisely. Inadequate staff numbers in the NHS and education reflects poor HR policy implementation.
Perception is not necessarily reality.
Some HR leaders have a significant impact on the future success of their businesses. They have CEOs who trust their judgement and back their actions especially on “difficult” issues. They demonstrate courage, have superb influencing skills and are visible even during tough times. Critically, they all have corporate OD responsibility.
Perhaps Roden should not be too surprised. Shareholders want board members to demonstrate good governance across the whole business rather than just offering individual functional insight.
Thursday, 22 March 2012
Extra-ordinary
I have just finished my latest assignment and have been working for Pyramid ODI in four very different countries and cultures during the last year. Three special traits stand out in the memory.
Passionate lawyers – not a combo we would normally expect, but in this charity, helping a minority group, their dedication was infectious.
Knowing to say “No” – learning to reject bad business. An engineering order book that is full of nasty surprises; throwing away customers and profit. Can they learn fast enough?
Know what you do not know – a guy with the self-awareness and humility to recognise that the strategic change project had grown way beyond his current skill set. Willing to learn; he will succeed.
What is “extra-ordinary” at your company?
Passionate lawyers – not a combo we would normally expect, but in this charity, helping a minority group, their dedication was infectious.
Knowing to say “No” – learning to reject bad business. An engineering order book that is full of nasty surprises; throwing away customers and profit. Can they learn fast enough?
Know what you do not know – a guy with the self-awareness and humility to recognise that the strategic change project had grown way beyond his current skill set. Willing to learn; he will succeed.
What is “extra-ordinary” at your company?
Tuesday, 20 March 2012
Timing
Most of us enjoy a good joke. And, of course, the secret of good comedy is timing. Every weekend, you will also hear at least one sports commentator say that someone “showed perfect timing” or “makes time” when they achieved something out of the ordinary. Do we recognise that the same is true in business?
I recently sat in on a three-day Kaizen event. The objective was to identify areas of potential improvement by firstly mapping their key process – usually a fantastic technique.
The timing of the event, relative to the organization’s urgent need to deliver some high-value orders to key customers, appeared odd. Other actions, to mitigate risk and improve gross margin, were also put on hold.
In closing the event, the sponsor signalled that it may take two years to complete the process redesign, but left no guidance as to how this should happen. Chaos may ensue. Customers may continue to complain. Orders will be late. Is a perfectly good business, with hard working employees and a strong brand, being put at risk?
Did this experienced leader get it wrong? He was new to this business. His portfolio included many other plants serving other markets. He only spent a few days visiting before making an intuitive decision - what worked elsewhere should work here.
Before his “part-time” appointment to the role, his superiors invested little time in assessing the situation or the needs of the individuals involved. Collectively, they failed to complete an honest “Root Cause Analysis” of the issues.
This is a specific example, but I fear it is not unique. Executives must be seen to act decisively. If they are remote from the action, they simply do not know what they do not know. They must “make time” for old fashioned problem analysis if they want to achieve the extra-ordinary.
Was the executive’s intuition correct? Time will tell, but what do you think? Was the timing of the initiative poor? Is process improvement always more urgent than satisfying customers and delivering current commitments on time?
I recently sat in on a three-day Kaizen event. The objective was to identify areas of potential improvement by firstly mapping their key process – usually a fantastic technique.
The timing of the event, relative to the organization’s urgent need to deliver some high-value orders to key customers, appeared odd. Other actions, to mitigate risk and improve gross margin, were also put on hold.
In closing the event, the sponsor signalled that it may take two years to complete the process redesign, but left no guidance as to how this should happen. Chaos may ensue. Customers may continue to complain. Orders will be late. Is a perfectly good business, with hard working employees and a strong brand, being put at risk?
Did this experienced leader get it wrong? He was new to this business. His portfolio included many other plants serving other markets. He only spent a few days visiting before making an intuitive decision - what worked elsewhere should work here.
Before his “part-time” appointment to the role, his superiors invested little time in assessing the situation or the needs of the individuals involved. Collectively, they failed to complete an honest “Root Cause Analysis” of the issues.
This is a specific example, but I fear it is not unique. Executives must be seen to act decisively. If they are remote from the action, they simply do not know what they do not know. They must “make time” for old fashioned problem analysis if they want to achieve the extra-ordinary.
Was the executive’s intuition correct? Time will tell, but what do you think? Was the timing of the initiative poor? Is process improvement always more urgent than satisfying customers and delivering current commitments on time?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)