Monthly Archives: August 2011

Employee development for the next generation

So Steve Jobs has announced his retirement from Apple. And people are asking if the heart has been ripped out of the company. Some have even asked, “Is Apple doomed?” The markets reacted by knocking several percentage points off Apple shares immediately after the announcement. Others though are saying that Apple will continue to be successful because o its brand, product line and fanatical following, and because of its design team. But, they also worry that, without Jobs, Apple will become just another bean-counting corporation, without any creative zing or mojo, a good company but no longer a great one. Obviously no one knows however and we will have to wait and see what actually happens.

But this retirement event – and it is an event since Apple are one one of the biggest, most successful and most influential companies in the last 50 years, and Steve Jobs has been the key player in it – should give all companies, big and small, food for thought. Is company life and succession after the retirement of the boss, especially such an influential boss as Jobs, properly considered and planned for?

IMHO, Steve Jobs may correctly be considered one of the all-time great company leaders, while he was there, but unless he has created the necessary conditions for someone(s) to succeed him and for them to continue leading the company more or less in the same way that he has, then his greatness will have had its limits.

The Apple board have already named the successor, the internal appointment of the former COO. And they have a wonderful team of people at the top. (Or at least they have wonderful people at the top who have been key to Apple’s success, but whether they are a team and whether they can operate as a team without Jobs is another matter.) So at least some of the conditions for effective succession and continuation therefore appear to be in place.

But, and this is a big but, I wonder whether the new CEO and his team allowed themselves to be disempowered by Jobs’ charisma and genius while he was there. I wonder, did they tend to rely on his intuition and not on their own when making strategic decisions?  Did they try and second-guess what they thought he would say rather than working things out for themselves?  Did they always defer to him rather than asserting their own views? These are the sorts of behaviors I have seen senior managers exhibit when there is a ‘great’ leader in the top job. And if they got into the habit of behaving like this when Jobs was around, I think they will have difficulty thinking for themselves, making decisions by themselves and for taking full responsibility.

If you are a CEO, whether of a small or large company, have a look at Jim Collins’ view of ‘Level 5 leadership’. However good you are as a CEO, you should always be wary of attracting power and responsbilility from the next generation to yourself. Instead, you should act to empower them as much as they can take so they can effectively take over from you when the time comes and continue your good work. Maybe Jobs has done this at Apple, we’ll see, but when a great leader departs, great companies risk going from Great to only Good.

In the bquest employee development system, we encourage participants to value the development of the next generation as part of their own development.

Share

bquest employees bring valuable knowledge into the company by going outside the company and searching the internet

 

Current McKinsey research Measuring the value of search finds that “In the five countries we studied, knowledge workers experienced search-related productivity gains of up to $117 billion, flowing from faster and more accurate access to information.”

There are two ways to get new knowledge into a small business – either generate it yourself internally through experimentation, questioning and learning, or by bringing it in from outside through consultants or, more cheaply, by reading books and articles or by searching the internet and talking with outsiders.

bquest does both! How?

Firstly, put aside any reservations you may have from stories you have heard about the quality of information on Wikipedia or in online discussion forums, or about the time you need to sort the gold from the dross. In my experience, you can quickly learn searching skills so you can:

  • search quickly by choosing the right key words and combinations of key words, by skimming the results and by getting to know which sites are useful and which not;
  • validate the information you find by getting several answers from different sites, by checking the data for currency, and by talking with relevant people in person or on discussion forums;
  • organise the mass of information into something that makes sense.

Any person leaving school should be able to do this – more or less well – because children now learn to do searches from an early age!

In bquest developmental projects – the learning contracts – each employee has a structured approach to learning that involves the full cycle of experiential learning: Theorising, Planning, Action and Reflection. Internally to the company, employees generate new knowledge for the company.

But when doing their learning contracts they also bring new knowledge in from outside. They develop some of the attributes of the ‘resource investigator’ as the famous British researcher Meredith Belbin would call them.

For example, in some current learning contracts that employees are doing, they have searched and found hugely valuable information, new to the company, on such diverse topics as:

  • changes to international quality criteria;
  • developing a new way to negotiate and write simple contracts that apportion risk;
  • guidance on improving lean manufacturing;
  • how to look at the company as a ‘soft system’ so as to understand all its complexities and to make fundamental changes;
  • managing the difference between problems of employee performance and conduct;
  • tips on raising sales;
  • using a database for storing R and D results.

All quality, reliable and free information that will be of great value to the company!

 

Share

Employee development for talented employees

Chris Argyris, one of the greats of management learning, began his 1991 seminal article for Harvard Business Review, ‘Teaching smart people to learn’ with:

“success in the marketplace increasingly depends on learning, yet most people don’t know how to learn. What’s more, those members of the organization that many assume to be the best at learning are, in fact, not very good at it. I am talking about the well-educated, high-powered, high-commitment professionals who occupy key leadership positions in the modern corporation.”

He argues that learning is not just about solving problems, but it should make managers and talented employees examine their approach to identifying and solving problems since doing having the ‘wrong’ approach often turns out to be a major cause of problems. How often do you see people solve a problem only to find it is the wrong problem which is solved? Or they just tackle the sympton and not the cause? Or how often does solving one problem cause another problem somewhere else to emerge?

bquest uses an action learning approach to development, more precisely a ‘managed’ action learning approach where you don’t learn by trial and error – yes, learning from mistakes is important, but it can be wasteful and damaging! – but where your trial of ‘new’ actions is based on some form of recognised good practice that has worked elsewhere but which is adapted to the local context to give it good chance of being successful first time.

When reviewing their trial of new actions, the employee reflects in a structured way with the help of the bquest coach. Which new actions worked, which didn’t, why? What can be done better next time? This structured reflection looks at the ‘problem’ and how it was or, if still ongoing, is being solved. But the bquest coach also asks the employee about how they went about planning their new actions, what model of good practice or theories were they using, why they chose one approach over another. They examione what Argyris calls their ‘theories in action.’

They then go back even further and ask why the problem that they thought needed new actions was seen as a problem in the first place; some problems don’t need ‘learning’ to be done, they simply need to be looked at in a different way, and some problems weren’t actually problems.

By following Argyris’s ideas, bquest makes employee development deeper and helps the employee become more capable of meeting new challenges (and opportunities) more effectively and efficiently for themselves.

This is a long-lasting capability any business should want from its key employees.

Share

Cost optimzation, yes, all the time – but you also need agility

A June 2011 report by The Conference Board finds that CEOs say growth is their number one challenge, with innovation, new markets and cost optimization being critical to growth. I quote:

“Quality departments are uniquely positioned to help accelerate growth through better execution and alignment. If today’s quality leaders are to meet this challenge, however, they must both contribute to operational efficiency and possess a macro view of the business that cuts across functions, geographies, and business lines.”

Well, surprise, surprise! Is this new? Aren’t these factors always important?

It always saddens me that ‘cost optimization’ usually means cutting head count. We had some great exceptions in the early days of the current global crisis when some companies were able to cut costs immediately but avoided cutting people by going on short time, taking holidays early, negotiating lower wages for a period, and other simple but effective means to retain good workers, and retain their know-how and morale in readiness for the upturn. Contrast this with what we now see the big bank HSBC now doing with its plan to cut 30000 employees, though to be fair some of those cuts will be the result of a change in business model rather than optimization.

To avoid the need for this head cutting type of  ’cost optimization’, I think management should be much more careful about the ‘architecture‘ of their company, that is, how it is designed and how all the parts fit together. (Have a look also at ‘soft systems’.) With a good design, you can get ‘agility’, the ability to move quickly and painlessly in different directions.

For example, every company has peaks and troughs in volumes of work. So, can you design the company to have a core set of employees to service the lower volumes, and have a pool of part-timers or co-producers who can help out with the peak volumes? Or, can you design your contracts with customers in a way that allows flexibility in volumes and changes in focus when the market situation changes? Or can you design your product or service so that it allows a degree of quality customization, for example to provide cheaper variants when times are tough for your customers and to get back to higher quality when times are good? Can you organise your company so people from different functions bring their brains toegther and generate quicker problem solving and more innovation? Can you train your employees so they can adapt quickly to deal with new challenges? And on and on…

There are so many ways, many cost-free, to create agility in your business, even in mass production line scenarios where the line is often a key determinant of how the business works, that should enable you to manage the ups and downs and external changes of ‘normal’ business life.

And cost-opimization? Come on, using your resources optimally should be a fundamental characteristic of any company, 24/7, in both good times and bad, and not just occasionally important.

Share

You want your business to prosper. But will it even survive?

At bquest, our goal is to help businesses develop and grow by developing their key employeeses. In doing so, we build their basic and competitive capabilities and we also have to help them solve a lot of problems.

But putting in herculean effort, solving problems, learning, developing and adapting sometimes turns out to be not enough, and you find out the business   has no viable future. Sometimes a decision ought to be taken to let the business die. But it is often a challenge to know when to give up.

  • When would you decide your business is no longer worth fighting for
  • When do you give up ‘hitting your head against a brick wall’?
  • When do you ‘throw in the towel’?
  • When do you ‘face the music’?

Some people are incapable of ‘seeing the writing on the wall’. (See how many ways we have of saying this! It is obviously an important problem for us.) You may have heard of the famous (infamous?) list of possible things you can do when you find you are riding a dead horse? It’s a great example of ‘turning a blind eye.’

Maybe facts like these might help you face reality. Ibisworld recently published their reseach into ‘dying industries’ in the US. In the last 10 years these sectors have declined in revenue:

  • wired telecommunications – 55%
  • textile mills – 50%
  • newspaper publishing – 36%
  • apparel manufacturing – 77%
  • DVD, game and video rental shop – 36%
  • manufactured homes – 73%
  • video postproduction – 25%
  • record stores – 76%
  • photofinishing – 70%
  • formal and costume rental – 35%

Their predicted further decline over the next five years is equally alarming.

If you work in some of those sectors it would seem perhaps possible that you could exploit your know-how in some way and adapt into other products or services or business model. Major change is always difficult and there will be casualties, but it is hopefully possible for some. Or is that sentiment, just another example of ‘ignoring the obvious’? In some sectors though (rental shops? photofinishing?) it seems to me that the horse has three feet in the grave and no amount of flogging it will help. It is time to put it out of its misery and leave gracefully. Hey guys, get out while you can!

And that raises another important question – when you eventually come to accept your business (or pet idea or project or golf handicap or relationship or whatever it was that was important to you) is finally, completely, for ever bust, how do you walk away gracefully and on your own terms, ready and positively charged to get on with the next stage in your life? Can we help you with this?

 

 

 

Share