What’s UP (Weekly, Hot, Applicable Topic Summary - Unbiased Perspective)

Workplace Diversity

According to a study at Cornell University (2010), Workplace diversity is a people issue focused on the differences and similarities that people bring to an organization. It addresses issues specified legally in equal opportunity and affirmative action non-discrimination statutes. Too often, organizational perceptions and beliefs around workplace diversity are centered on our demographic differences. Issues related to demographic differences include, but are not limited to: age; disabilities; gender; lifestyle; nationality; race; religion; and sexual orientation.

In theory, diversity is considered to be inclusive of everyone. In many ways, diversity initiatives complement non-discrimination compliance programs by creating the workplace environment and organizational culture for making differences work. However, diversity also includes our differences such as profession, education, parental status and geographic location. Furthermore, workplace diversity relates to our competencies, business acumen, training, and experience.

Managing a diverse workforce is not a science; it is an art. There is no roadmap or a “how to guide” on successfully leading a diverse team. Add the strategic operations of a virtual workforce where members of the team are dispersed in numerous locations across town; across the oceans; or across the globe (and language differences are introduced), and the challenges increase (Shen, Chanda, D’Netto, Monga, 2009). Diversity is about learning from others who are not the same, about dignity and respect for all, and about creating workplace environments and practices that encourage learning from others and capture the advantage of diverse perspectives (Cornell University, 2010).

The manner in which our demographic differences are addressed is not the same as how our professional areas of expertise are addressed. Briefly consider the following real-life scenarios in the Corporate America environment. First, the workplace/team building celebrations at the end of December are no longer called Christmas parties, but holiday parties. Second, many companies have opted to change their vacation benefits from including religious or cultural type days. They merely give all employees a specified amount of “personal” days (typically 2-3 weeks) to use as deemed appropriate. These behaviors demonstrate an atmosphere of inclusiveness and respect for employees.

On the other hand, consider the workplace dynamic of how the values and opinions of employees with different professions are managed. Are the viewpoints and opinions of leaders in the finance or accounting or operations department regarded and respected in the same manner as the viewpoints and opinions of leaders in the HR or IT departments? Are employees in every department even invited to participate in key decision making discussions? Involving those with different viewpoints can help to provide a competitive advantage, and possibly present innovative advancements not considered in the past (Lockwood, 2005; Tetteh, 2008).

Conversely, intolerance and lack of acceptance of workplace diversity (in all of its forms), can lead to harassment, discrimination, and possibly violence. Simultaneously, lack of acceptance can lead to poor employee morale and poor team productivity. In a publicly held company, lack of team productivity and effectiveness; or negative news about employee relations can lead to devaluation of the corporation’s stock price (Cook, Glass, 2009).

Because there is no definitive process for managing a diverse organization, each leader must conscientiously observe and develop these practices through their experiences. However, this development must begin with a comprehensive list of other attitudes, behaviors, and values the leader must already possess in their “toolbox” of skills such as: honesty; integrity; and communication. Without this existing skill set, a leader will find the challenge of building confidence and trust and managing a diverse team a difficult task to accomplish.

Hiring, developing, promoting, rewarding employees based on their diverse backgrounds instead of on their knowledge, skills, abilities, and competencies will not lead to an effective workforce. Although this short term, situational/transactional leadership practice may suffice to comply with Equal Employment Opportunity regulations, the probability of producing a high performing long term, sustainable team is minimal. There is a viable pipeline of competent and capable professionals within the U.S. workforce – both inside and outside of the corporation. It is the responsibility of corporate leaders to openly demonstrate and champion the diversity initiative by investing the time and effort to identify, invite, and include those with different backgrounds into the organization.

More information on Workplace Diversity and its effect on team productivity and business operations can be found in :

Corporate Leadership Selection: Impact on American Business, Employees, and Society.

Input and feedback to this blog is always welcome.

References

Cook, A., & Glass, C. (2009). Between a rock and a hard place: managing diversity in a shareholder society. Human Resource Management Journal, 19(4), 393-412. doi:10.1111/j.1748-8583.2009.00100.x.

Lockwood, N. (2005). Workplace Diversity is Leveraging Power of Difference for Competitive Advantage. HR Magazine. (50, 6).

Shen, J., Chanda, A., D'Netto, B., & Monga, M. (2009). Managing diversity through human resource management: an international perspective and conceptual framework. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(2), 235-251. Doi: 10.1080/09585190802670516.

Tetteh, V. (2008). Diversity in the Workplace. Research Strategies Business. P. 1-15.

Workplace Diversity (2010). Cornell University Library. Retrieved December 1, 2010 from www.ilr.cornell.edu/library/research/subjectguides/workplacediversity.html

What’s UP (Weekly, Hot, Applicable Topic Summary - Unbiased Perspective)

Whistleblowing

Whistleblowing is an employee action of reporting what they perceive to be unethical, immoral, or illegal corporate activity to an outside third party. The third party may be the media (i.e. newspaper, radio, television, etc.). It may be a governmental agency accountable for regulating the corporation’s activities. The third party could even be interested groups and citizens in the community the corporation operates in. Our society and culture craves access to instant information. Technological advancements have catered to these desires with mechanisms such as: corporate grapevines on the internet; You Tube; Facebook; and “tweets” on Twitter to report positive and negative information – along with accurate and inaccurate information – on corporate behavior and activity. This blog entry discusses the whistleblowing activity and the future career prospects for employees who follow their conscious and report corporate behavior to outside third parties.

Minimizing the Risk of Employee Whistleblowing

Organizations can minimize whistleblowing by giving employees an avenue to share concerns and express dissenting viewpoints on the company’s activities. This can be done in a manner where issues can be discussed and resolved within the company, instead of outside the company. Whereas this belief may curtail whistleblowing of perceived unethical corporate behavior, it will not (nor should not) deter whistleblowing of illegal activity. Here are a few examples of illegal activity, and non-compliance of governmental regulations which will warrant notification to other parties, preferably authoritative and regulatory entities:

· In order to minimize the expense of managing and properly disposing of waste material, a manufacturing company dumps its waste into landfills or in a nearby lake, river, or other large body of water;
· In an effort to minimize operational expenses, a food company “cuts corners” in governmental safety rules for sanitation and maintenance of equipment used in processing and/or packaging food;
· While maximizing profitability and shareholder value, a company purposely misrepresents its statements of financial position.

An Ethical Dilemma

There are no “gray areas” in the examples listed above. However, there are numerous scenarios where a perceived wrong doing by one employee may not be viewed in the same manner as another employee. In this situation, one’s personal values and beliefs come into play. One employee may feel it is “acceptable” for a lending institution to charge exorbitant interest rates to its customers. Another employee may feel it is good business sense to charge as much as legally possible. Another example would be corporate offshoring. Many U.S. companies now offshore a part of their operations to other countries where labor costs are lower. A question of ethical behavior centers on normalization of employee salaries. “Should a company pay the same rate and offer the same benefits to employees in other countries that they offer to employees in the U.S.”?

U.S. corporations specifically state one of the reasons for offshoring is to take advantage of a qualified, yet cheaper labor market in other countries. However, this management strategy is done at the expense of U.S. workers, and arguably contributes to forcing its own citizens into poverty. A degree of “right or wrong” can be found in the reactions of the organization’s various stakeholders. Further, the magnitude of reaction may be determined by who is doing the whistleblowing. Typically, this activity is done by a disgruntled employee. And their audience may be dissatisfied consumers.

Nonetheless, if the organization is paying lower salaries to employees in other countries, the company is chastised for contributing to the U.S. unemployment statistics. If the organization is paying equal (or higher) salaries to employees in other countries, the company is chastised by shareholders and the investment community for not maximizing their potential profitability.

Future Implications

Debate around the benefits and shortcomings of whistleblowing will continue in the foreseeable future. On the one hand, consumers and organizational stakeholders should be informed about corporate practices which may cause harm to the public. On the other hand, so called “watchdogs” or disgruntled employees may be sending erroneous or inaccurate reports of corporate wrongdoing, which incites the public, but has minimal basis for further investigation.

There is one final point on whistleblowing. If one reviews any cases of where an employee publicized unethical, immoral, or illegal corporate activity during the past 10-15 years, you will find very little has been reported about the current career or professional life of the employee who reported the incident (if in fact the whistleblower has been successful in finding/maintaining a similar type position). A question to ponder: “Can a whistleblower expect to have a career in an organization (any organization) after publicizing corporate wrongdoing”?

More information on corporate leadership behavior can be reviewed in Corporate Leadership Selection: Impact on American Business, Employees, and Society (Authorhouse Publishing).
Feedback to this blog entry is always welcome.

What’s UP (Weekly, Hot, Applicable Topic Summary - Unbiased Perspective)

CEO Succession – An Example from British Petroleum (BP)

On July 27, 2010, the Board of Directors at British Petroleum (BP) announced that Robert Dudley will replace Tony Hayward as Group Chief Executive Officer, effective October 1, 2010. This blog entry will share some of the existing literature and research findings on CEO selection. The intent of this entry is not to place BP, its board, or its managing executives in a negative light, but to compare the BP real-life scenario to theory and practices in the leadership selection process.

Corporate Board Responsibility

First, and most important, I extend my deepest and sincerest condolences to the families and loved ones of those who lost their lives in the explosion from the deepwater drilling. Hopefully, the BP Board of Directors and executive management team has done the same in addition to setting up a $100 Million Fund for workers and families impacted. It can be difficult in trying to place a price on the loss of human life. On the one hand, $100 million is a significant amount of money. On the other hand, $100 million to a company that consistently reports annual profits in the tens of billions of dollars is miniscule.

The corporation’s board of directors is accountable for CEO selection. Selecting a Chief Executive Officer is a crucial decision an organization makes. CEO selection is a reflection of the organization’s identity – its culture, people, strategy and structure, and environment. Simultaneously, Corporations are faced with the challenge of developing leaders, but corporations have not developed enough talented leaders to successfully fill the internal pipeline with CEO level candidates. As a result, a number of corporate boards now make it a requirement for the current CEO to help develop and groom a successor. Further, corporate boards now evaluate and compensate CEO’s on their ability to execute this critical assignment. Yes, company performance is a major measuring stick, but so is executive development to ensure longevity and sustainability of corporate operations.

Internal CEO Selection

In order to promote an executive from within the company to the level of CEO, there has to be a succession planning process and an executive development process where internal candidates are groomed for the CEO position. According to Mr. Dudley’s biography and accomplishments listed on the BP website, he has been extremely successful in his various roles. There are only a few executives within a corporation that would possess the knowledge, skills, and abilities to develop the company’s next CEO – the existing CEO; a prior CEO serving on the corporate board; or a corporate board member who has CEO experience from an outside company. The BP website did not give any information if Robert Dudley was developed and groomed by his predecessor, Tony Hayward, or by other board members. The information given was that the existing CEO is being replaced, and the new CEO has been chosen from within the organization.

From an alternative viewpoint, “promoting from within” is a positive sign to an organization’s employees. It demonstrates that hard work and appropriate employee development will be rewarded with additional responsibility and authority. A crucial selling point to newly recruited executives is the ability to grow and move up within the company. If a corporation does not have the development and succession planning processes in place to help their employees advance, talented executives from outside of the organization may be skeptical about joining such an organization.

Societal Perspective

During the past two months, one of the questions I have asked in both graduate and undergraduate business classes is “because of the BP accident in the Gulf of Mexico, will you still purchase products and services from the company?” The classes included were: Organizational Theory and Behavior; Management and Supervision; Critical Thinking; Organizational Analysis; and Introduction to Research.

Although this approach constitutes a highly informal survey, the responses were an overwhelming “yes”. The general consensus was if consumers were to boycott or refuse to buy goods and services from every company that makes a mistake, there would be very few companies to purchase any goods and services from. The amount of adult learners who emphatically stated that they would not use BP products and services was minimal. There were more respondents who stated that they did not give any consideration to the leadership selection or practices of the gasoline stations they went to. The only concern was one of the prices of the gasoline.

Final Thoughts

An additional critical role of the corporate board of directors is to protect the investments of the corporation’s shareholders. The board is responsible for reviewing the corporate strategies and processes for providing a return on shareholder investment. When selecting a new CEO, the board is communicating to the investment community their confidence in identifying the right leader.

Selecting an external CEO implies the organization is changing its direction and possibly its overall corporate vision. Selecting an internal CEO implies the existing direction and vision is fine. Monitoring the fluctuations in BP stock prices will give a clear indication of the investment community’s perspective and acceptance of the newly appointed leader. Of course, the true societal and investment community reaction will be seen at the end of the 4th Quarter of 2010 when Robert Dudley has been in the role for 90 days.

More information on CEO selection and can be reviewed in Corporate Leadership Selection: Impact on American Business, Employees, and Society (Authorhouse Publishing).

Feedback to this blog entry is always welcome.

What’s UP (Weekly, Hot, Applicable Topic Summary - Unbiased Perspective)

Luring and Retaining Top Talent – The Compensation Game

The entries in this blog have always pertained to current issues and management trends of the 21st Century business environment. This bi-monthly entry will address an interesting activity which has been highlighted in both the business world and the sports world with much anticipation and fanfare – LeBron James and the creative incentive packages this star athlete has been offered. These salary packages and perks can readily be compared to the salaries and perks offered to “star” executives and top talented employees at numerous corporations.

Similarities and Differences in Management Approach

Some of the reported salary terms and perks presented to LeBron - also known as LBJ - were $30 million/year in salary; a lifetime supply of beer (not sure if there are many people who make $30 million/year that can’t already supply themselves with enough beer for a lifetime); and a personalized episode of a cartoon show called Family Guy. These were some of the “goodies” the Cleveland Cavaliers offered in order to keep their top talent. There was no mention if there was any communication between the organization and LeBron James to see if these were the types of compensation and perks that he was looking to receive.

According to the Wall Street Journal (July, 2009), some of the biggest banks (who also received federal financial assistance) offered multiyear/multi million packages, not only to retain their own talent, but to also lure top talent from competitors. This trend of offering salaries at the top or above the “normal” pay scale has drawn additional scrutiny for a couple of reasons. First, when major banks and lending institutions requested federal financial assistance, was compensation for luring and retaining top talent the primary intent? Second, it is one thing for profitable and successful organizations to offer hefty compensation packages. It is something different for unprofitable and unsuccessful companies to also offer similar types of salary packages and perks. However, the attitude and behavior is almost necessary by the smaller and less profitable organizations if they want to try and remain competitive. In the sports world of the National Basketball Association (NBA), this is equivalent to currently unsuccessful franchises like the New York Knicks or the Los Angeles Clippers offering LeBron James $30 million/year.

The notable differences observed between offering huge salaries in the business world and the sports world is the business world’s concept of a hefty salary is $2-3 million/year, whereas the NBA is offering $20-30 million/year. In the business world, the leader’s integrity is questioned for making such offers. In the sports world, the leader’s sanity is questioned. A final observation is the federal government is paying close attention and is considering a means to regulate compensation in the business world. The federal government has not considered regulating compensation in the sports/entertainment world – yet.

Pay to Play

From another perspective, organizations that choose not to compete for top talent with large salaries and exorbitant perks stand to lose out. In the business world, loss of top talent may result in poor productivity and effectiveness. Loss of talented employees may also mean a loss of investors or a lower valuation of the company’s stock. In the sports world, the loss of top talent could result in a loss of fan support or maybe a relocation of the sports franchise. In both cases, a leadership decision of opting not to play along can be just as costly as conceivably overpaying a highly talented star.

There are no guarantees that bringing in top talent from another organization will result in success. The environment and surroundings that helped the star in the prior environment might not be in place in the new environment. Establishing a cohesive and highly productive unit occurs over time by working together with other teammates; not in the negotiation or selection phase which is conducted by the organization’s leader(s).

Nonetheless, the ultimate winner or loser will be the customer and/or sports fan. Some way, somehow, the organization will devise a means of relaying the expense to those who use, view, or enjoy the organization’s products and services. Compensation entails a number of components: base salary; short-term incentives; long-term incentives; employee benefits (i.e. health, medical, tuition reimbursement, etc.), and perquisites or perks. Because the organization’s objective is to make a profit, the employee compensation expense is transferred to the customers/fans by raising the price of the goods and services offered.

Final Thoughts

Based on one’s ethical values and beliefs, offering large salary packages to talented “stars” may be inappropriate management behavior. How can a company justify hefty salary increases and bonuses, especially if the company is not profitable? However, some may view the tactic of offering large salary packages and bonuses as a savvy business decision, or as a necessary evil. Organizational leaders in today’s business environment must carefully walk that fine line and make choices.

First, a leader must decide if they are going to actively engage in the competition to lure and retain top talent. Second, a leader must decide to what extent (or just how much) they are willing to offer and invest in a talented player. But most important, a leader must determine how to COMMUNICATE their decisions to the rest of the organization and its stakeholders in order to ensure the desired productivity and effectiveness of the team is not diminished. It is a very challenging task to navigate. On the one hand, it can be very successful and result in a championship or increased profits. On the other hand, the decision has the potential for chaos, low morale, and team dysfunction. It can be a distasteful, unsavory situation to be in. Those on the outside looking in will have mixed emotions; some will like the decisions; some will not. But in the words of my sons’ generation, “don’t hate the player – hate the game.”

More information on the selecting and retaining top talent can be reviewed in Corporate Leadership Selection: Impact on American Business, Employees, and Society (Authorhouse Publishing).

Feedback to this blog entry is always welcome.

What’s UP (Weekly, Hot, Applicable Topic Summary - Unbiased Perspective)

21st Century Leadership in Action – Part II

As a faculty member of the University of Phoenix, I had the distinct honor of being on stage at the 2010 Commencement Ceremony. The commencement was held in Phoenix, AZ on June 25th & 26th, and the keynote address was delivered by former U.S. Secretary of State, Dr. Condoleeza Rice. Whenever a keynote address is delivered, members of the audience will have distinct memories (and selective hearing) of what they hold to be valuable. This blog entry will highlight my interpretations – strictly from a leadership perspective.

Leadership Traits

First, and most important, Dr. Condoleeza Rice displayed the charisma, ingenuity, and poise we expect from a head of state. Dr. Rice clearly articulated a shared vision of U.S. diplomacy and global responsibility as a major player on the international scene. Whether respected, revered, or reviled, the U.S. has the potential for influence (i.e. military, political, financial, and social) in numerous countries throughout the world.

Dr. Rice spoke of her personal development and training in international studies at the University of Denver, which helped prepare her for her role as Secretary of State. She reminisced about that development and training as she recalled her meeting with Russian leader, Mikhail Gorbachev. As a global leader, developing confidence and trust is an important characteristic just like in the corporate business environment. During her time as Secretary of State, Dr. Rice was successful in conducting extremely crucial negotiations and agreements with foreign leaders built on trust and ethical standards.

A Message to the Graduating Class

Second, Dr. Rice specifically detailed expectations of college graduates. I did observe that other speakers such as the University Phoenix President, Dr. Bill Pepicello, mention the commencement ceremony does not represent the end of the journey, but the beginning. Dr. Rice emphasized the fact that as college educated members of society, we must reject/refute the negative perceptions that exist around leadership values, beliefs, attitudes, and intent.

As a lifelong learner and faculty practitioner adept in conducting research, I found this statement from Dr. Rice very inspirational. The degree of rhetoric and fallacies we encounter on a daily basis has cluttered our collective critical thinking process, and deterred logical, rational decision making. Technological advancements have also contributed to how we access and interpret information. It is not uncommon to read negative and inaccurate comments made on news company’s front page websites. As an example, sites such as MSNBC.com, CNN.com, Yahoo.com and others will report a news story and provide the opportunity for readers to reply and post their thoughts. I might add the spelling, punctuation, and grammar of some of those respondents also leaves a lot to be desired. Nonetheless, conducting research and viewing any topic from the perspective of both sides will increase the probability of getting truthful and accurate details.

In her address, Dr. Rice also discussed what she viewed as overcoming obstacles. She briefly discussed her early age desire of becoming a renowned pianist. After meeting much younger, more talented pianists, she realized it was time to resort to “Plan B” and a change of career aspirations. In the real-life business environment, we are constantly faced with unforeseen and unexpected events. Sometimes, our success is dependent upon how quickly we identify and alter our course of action. 21st Century leaders who do not readily react to unforeseen and unexpected changes in their environment stand the risk of failure.

Finally, Dr. Rice exhorted the class to also “reach back and help others because someone reached back to help you.” I found this part of the keynote address inspiring as well. It is critical for business leaders to establish and maintain strategic alliances. Building such relationships enables the organization to realize increased business opportunities, which otherwise may not have been possible. Reaching back to help others can be a mutual benefit. On the one hand, an established and successful business leader can help others develop and become future successful business leaders. On the other hand, the mentor can simultaneously work on their skills in developing and grooming future leaders.

Concluding Thoughts

There were other enlightening speakers involved in the commencement. Mr. Neil Bush (son of the 41st President, George Bush, and brother of the 43rd President, George W. Bush) spoke on the Points of Light Foundation, and its importance in improving social literacy. Mr. Randy Jackson (of American Idol fame) also inspired the graduating class by quoting the Serenity Prayer (“God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I can not change; the courage to change the things I can; and the wisdom to know the difference.”).

One final comment that stuck out from Dr. Rice’s address was in her opening remarks. She mentioned that she has fond memories of her own commencement ceremony at the University of Denver. She could remember sharing the day’s events with family and friends. She can also remember receiving her degree in International Studies. However, she could not remember ANY of the comments from the keynote speaker. Dr. Rice then stated that the members of this class would not remember the comments of today’s keynote speaker either. This is one time I sincerely hope and truly believe our beloved former U.S. Secretary of State is wrong.

More information on the leadership traits can be reviewed in Corporate Leadership Selection: Impact on American Business, Employees, and Society (Authorhouse Publishing).

Feedback to this blog entry is always welcome.

What’s UP (Weekly, Hot, Applicable Topic Summary - Unbiased Perspective)

21st Century Leadership in Action

During the past year, I have utilized this blog to address some of the pressing issues which business leaders of the 21st Century must be able to identify and resolve in order to ensure a reasonable level of corporate success. These monthly/bi-monthly entries focused on business leaders’ attitudes, behaviors, and values with the current day challenges of globalization, workplace diversity, and technological advancement. The following entry demonstrates 21st Century business leadership in action.
In March 2010, I was accepted as a member of Boardroom Bound – a 501(c)(3) National Public Service nonprofit, whose mission is to foster good governance, independence and diversity in the 21st Century boardroom. Boardroom Bound’s objective is to develop business leaders for future service in nonprofit, private business and publicly traded boardrooms. Boardroom Bound strives to fill the boardroom pipeline with highly qualified women and minority business leaders who are prepped to resolve business dilemmas such as balancing the quest for short term profits, long term sustainability, community social responsibility, and environmental citizenship.
Field research and personal experience have shown that the attitudes, beliefs, and values from leadership at the top of the organization will trickle down and become the attitudes, beliefs, and values of the employees within the organization. In this blog entry, I would like to share the following letter to Crain’s Chicago Business magazine from the Boardroom Bound Founder, Linda K. Bolliger about Diversity on Boards. More information on corporate leadership can be found in Corporate Leadership Selection: Impact on American Business, Employees, and Society (Authorhouse Publishing) now on sale through Amazon.com, Borders, and Barnes & Noble. For more details, please click on the icon of the book on the left side of this page.

Feedback to the weekly blog entry is always welcome.


OpEd: U.S. companies should make boardroom diversity a national economic imperative

LINDA BOLLIGER is chairman of Boardroom Bound in Northbrook.
By: Linda Bolliger January 18, 2010
The Securities and Exchange Commission should be congratulated for proposing measures addressing the poor business and governance practices instrumental in the 2008 Wall Street meltdown that nearly sacked the global economy and diminished America's standing in the eyes of the world.
In a July report, the commission solicited public comment on the need to address diversity policy and disclosure practices in boardrooms by publicly traded companies. It adopted it as a ruling in December. This new regulatory development is a natural evolution of diversity best business practices.
Since the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education case ended racial segregation in schools and public facilities, corporate America has invested billions of dollars in developing diverse human capital. Today, it is wrestling with the law of unintended consequences, as this same human capital knocks on its boardroom doors for admittance.
The corporate cries and pleas of difficulty in finding qualified, diverse candidates apparently fell on deaf ears. The recent ruling for publicly traded companies to report on boardroom diversity policy and disclosure is an additional arrow in the regulatory quiver to address the corporate board homogeny, cronyism and lockstep thinking that gave us the era of CEO-centric boards, from which America remains hung over.
These non-diverse boards produced today's excessive executive pay and risk-management issues. Finally, this era will fade as more diverse perspectives help American business compete effectively in a 21st-century global marketplace.
Now that the SEC has addressed this issue, it is counterintuitive for companies to ignore it. Companies that disparaged Sarbanes-Oxley legislation enacted in 2002 as too costly, time-consuming and intrusive sang the same tune in their public comments last year when the SEC proposed the diversity amendments adopted in December — despite the fact that members of diverse groups already represent the largest untapped resource for corporate board service. Protestations aside, when mining this talent pool became the law of the land, it became the corporate community's responsibility in both the workforce and the boardroom.
The real issue here is not "whether to" but rather how quickly corporate leaders can accept that diversity has become a requisite part of doing business. Ensuring recruitment of diverse director candidates and preparing next-generation business leaders to provide quality governance are key 21st-century business imperatives for protecting America's future standing in the global marketplace. Our national economic security depends upon companies fostering inclusive, quality governance.
Bravo to those companies that already diversified their boardrooms; and kudos to the SEC for proposing ways to nudge others to push diversity best practices in the corporate boardroom where they belong.

©2010 by Crain Communications Inc.

What’s UP (Weekly, Hot, Applicable Topic Summary - Unbiased Perspective)

Corporate Mergers and Organizational Leadership

During the first-ten years of the 21st Century, organizational leadership and corporate strategy has embraced the concepts of mergers and acquisitions. Whereas the intent may be to form a larger and perhaps stronger, more efficient business entity, the consequences of corporate mergers (and rumors of corporate mergers) has possibly contributed to a few of our countries most pressing problems such as: fluctuating corporate valuation and corporate greed; mistrust of big business; companies “too big to fail”; and unemployment. This blog entry will address the corporate merger scenario and review its impact.

Corporate Merger Objectives

A corporate merger occurs when two separate, independent companies agree to combine their resources (i.e. assets, liabilities, capital, customers, employees, etc.) and become one company. There are a number of reasons why corporations may agree to merge. The current trend of corporate mergers reveals three potential benefits to the companies involved.

First, a merger can help increase market share. A corporate merger can facilitate the growth of two smaller companies into one larger company. By absorbing a competitor, there is increased market power to set prices for corporate goods and services. A second, desired result of a corporate merger is improved financial performance of the combined entities. Corporate expenses can be reduced by eliminating duplicate operations. Two accounting departments can consolidate into one accounting department. Two marketing or technology or sales teams can consolidate into marketing or technology or sales team.

Third, an opportunity for corporate tax relief is possible. For example, a profitable company may buy an unprofitable company for the purpose of using the unprofitable company’s operating loss for reduced tax liability. There are federal regulations and government oversight on the volume of losses allowed, nonetheless, this is still an acceptable corporate strategy.

Disadvantages of Corporate Mergers

The existing literature and research on corporate mergers has not identified very many positive benefits of this strategy for the communities, citizens, and employees the corporations serve. However, a number of disadvantages and challenges around corporate mergers have been discovered. The ill-conceived notion that corporate mergers produce a larger, improved business entity has resulted in documented cases of failed mergers. This is especially visible where companies with unrelated technologies; misaligned corporate missions; and disparate management styles attempt to consolidate operations. The same reasoning, objectives, and justification for merging companies can also be the liabilities and disadvantages of merging companies.

A corporate merger can increase market share for the newly established company. It will increase market power for setting the price for the company’s goods and services. It may also influence pricing throughout the company’s industry. However, the goal of every company is to make a profit. Increased market power to set prices does not result in lower prices for consumers, but higher prices – and profits for the company (and in some cases, with poorer quality of merchandise). There are no corporate leaders who report their company has set market prices which will lower their corporate profitability!

The second justification for corporate mergers of reducing/eliminating operating expenses is a highly desirable objective. However, reducing and eliminating duplicate operations inevitably translates into workforce layoffs. There are no corporate leaders who report their company has merged with another company in order to hire more employees! The existing labor market and economic environment is fragile. With the U.S. Department of Labor reporting unemployment well over 10%, the labor market cannot withstand more corporate mergers at the expense of increased unemployment.

Finally, the strategy and belief of executing a corporate merger to benefit from reduced tax liability is egregious. There are numerous challenges in identifying innovative and creative initiatives to improve corporate profitability. In today’s business environment, there are also increased challenges in identifying “ethical” innovative and creative initiatives to improve corporate profitability. Using company resources to find unprofitable corporations to possibly merge with will not result in a long-term, profitable company. It will merely offer a short-term tax break, with higher prices on its products and more employee layoffs.

Implications for Leadership

The advantages and disadvantages of corporate mergers is a topic of debate. A study published in the Journal of Business Strategy (July, 2008) found that the target companies in corporate mergers lose 21% of their executives each year after an acquisition for approximately ten years. Because of the loss of executives, there is an impact to leadership continuity. With ever-changing leadership, there is also potential for the lack of knowledge transfer; mixed signals on corporate values, beliefs, and attitudes; and confusion among employees about their role in a newly established company.

When corporations merge, employees in both firms may become stressed or overcome with anxiety. “Survival” in the reorganized, merged company becomes the top priority of employees. They become concerned over job definition, accountability, responsibility, and security. During a corporate merger, there may be signs of uncertainty, or lack of communication on corporate direction. This malady may be particularly prevalent when companies of disparate goals and objectives combine. Employees observe who is selected to remain with the new organization; who is selected to be let go by the new organization; and who is chosen to serve in leadership positions in the new organization. In fact, employees will spend more time observing this phenomenon and discussing it among their peers than they will spend toward actually improving/increasing their productivity and effectiveness.

This scenario is an opportune time for the company leadership to clearly and honestly communicate with the environment in which it operates. Leadership must explain in detail what changes are being made; how/when the changes will be implemented; and how employees (as well as the communities and customers the organization serves) will be affected. Without such communication, employee productivity and effectiveness will suffer, and lack of communication will further exacerbate the challenges corporate mergers present. More information on the effects of mergers can be reviewed in Corporate Leadership Selection: Impact on American Business, Employees, and Society (Authorhouse Publishing).

Feedback to this blog entry is always welcome.

What’s UP (Weekly, Hot, Applicable Topic Summary - Unbiased Perspective)

TEAMWORK

There is no “I” in team. Implementing and maintaining a “team first” culture in the workplace may be the difference between realizing the desired benefits of productivity; high employee morale; and solvency versus the undesired results of ineffectiveness; lack of employee trust; and uncontrollable operating losses. This blog entry will address the concepts of teamwork and its impact on the company’s bottom line.

Teamwork Defined

Regardless of the type of workplace environment, communication, coordination, and cooperation among team members is an essential component for organizational success. Employees must contribute to an organizational atmosphere of working as a cohesive unit, valuing/respecting each other, and placing the achievement of the group over personal aspirations. Leaders must instill a culture of team building, valuing diversity, and recognizing/rewarding employees who demonstrate these behaviors.

The positive implications of teamwork can be seen in entities such as sports teams, medical staffs, five-star restaurants, and surgical teams to name a few. Whereas many companies have exerted significant effort and resources to foster teamwork and build high performing teams, there is still opportunity for improvement. Misdirected attitudes, values, and beliefs of individual performance are still prevalent in the workplace. The “me first” mentality is still a malady which permeates the work environment and our society. Our education system; our political landscape; our entertainment industries; and even our family structure emphasize personal accomplishment. Yet, we are expected to cast aside these possibly innate characteristics and assimilate, collaborate, and achieve team goals. Consider the fact that a job promotion is typically given to one individual – not to an entire team of individuals.

The Impact of a Lack of Teamwork

Sports teams that display a lack of teamwork may result in a team loss (or championship). Medical staffs that display a lack of teamwork may result in inadequate health care (or a botched surgical operation). Business workplace groups that display a lack of teamwork may turn into undesired operational business results. All such behaviors can have a negative impact on the bottom line – monetarily.

In some cases, a company’s normal course of business operations may inadvertently facilitate an environment non-conducive to teamwork. An example would be the insurance industry. On one hand, there are insurance sales agents. The insurance agent’s role and responsibility is to sell insurance policies and generate revenue. On the other hand, employees in the insurance risk management department are responsible for mitigating and limiting the liability and potential financial loss to the company. The risk management team may very well deny insurance coverage to an agent’s potential client if there is a financial risk to the company. Leaders with such challenges must devise consensus building and collaboration scenarios that will benefit the company as well as its employees.

Team Building Practices

Research has shown three practices (at a minimum) to be highly successful in curing the maladies of unproductive and ineffective teams while boosting employee morale, confidence, and trust. First, leaders must communicate what the goals and objectives of the team are. Employees are more apt to produce when they are aware of what is expected. Second, leaders must empower teams and involve teams in the decision-making process. Employees and teams who help with making decisions on the initiatives they are expected to execute are much more successful than employees and teams who are not a part of the decision making.

Third, leaders must recognize, acknowledge, and reward teams who consistently demonstrate the expected behaviors and attitudes. Recognizing employees publicly for their teamwork and success in accomplishing an initiative; acknowledging the professionalism and work ethic of a team; and/or offering monetary rewards to team members enhances team morale. In addition, when these leadership techniques are done in front of other employees within the organization, it serves as a catalyst for increased teamwork and productivity and for more employees to emulate the behaviors.

More importantly, executing these techniques will minimize the negative, dysfunctional activities of low employee morale; lack of productivity; and the possibility of employee sabotage or harboring ill-will towards other employees. Further, the organization may see curtailment in other organizational ailments such as employee absenteeism and employee turnover which also adversely affect the company bottom line. More information on delivering feedback can be reviewed in Corporate Leadership Selection: Impact on American Business, Employees, and Society (Authorhouse Publishing).

Feedback to the bi-monthly blog entry is always welcome.

What’s UP (Weekly, Hot, Applicable Topic Summary - Unbiased Perspective)

FEEDBACK

One of the most valuable items a leader can give to employees is feedback. Providing open and honest evaluations of employee performance may have a positive effect on workplace productivity. This blog entry will address the art of effectively communicating and delivering feedback to employees.

Positive Feedback

Delivering positive feedback can be a pleasant experience for both the manager and the subordinate. Managers take great pleasure in giving good performance reviews, or informing an employee on a regular basis that they are doing a good job. In addition, employees feel a sense of accomplishment when they are told they are doing a good job. In today’s business environment of corporate downsizing and job terminations, a “vote of confidence” from the organization’s leadership may also offer a sense of security for employees.

However, no employee is perfect. Every employee has an area which can be improved. A manager who has observed an employee’s strengths and weaknesses should be able to clearly communicate those observations in a constructive manner. Any manager who cannot communicate on employee’s strengths and weaknesses is doing a disservice to the employee as well as the organization. An opportunity for enhanced productivity and effectiveness may be missed.

Negative Feedback

Conversely, delivering negative feedback can be stressful and discouraging. If a manager has clearly defined employee expectations, and those expectations are not met, negative feedback should NOT come as a surprise. If the manager has not clearly defined employee expectations, the employee may or may not know there is a need for improvement. Moreover, the manager has adversely impacted organization effectiveness and productivity by not addressing the issue in a timely manner.

As a result, the manager’s timing in providing negative feedback is critical. Waiting for an annual employee performance review to provide negative feedback will not serve the purpose. Allowing an underperforming employee to continue underperforming until the performance review exacerbates the issue. And of course, ignoring poor performance has no positive value. If other employees notice poor performance is being ignored instead of corrected, employee morale and respect for the manager will also suffer.


Techniques for Delivering Negative Feedback

Another consideration in delivering negative feedback is how. Chastising an employee in front of their peers or clients will not produce the expected result. In fact, there is potential for an employee to take a defensive, retaliation-type stance. Research has shown a common practice for delivering negative feedback is a one-on-one discussion with the employee to state what was wrong; what can/should be done to improve; and how improvement will be identified.

A prevalent feedback technique is known as the “sandwich” approach. With this method, the manager first states what the employee has done correctly. It is followed with what the employee has done incorrectly (and what must be changed). Then the feedback is completed with positive comments about the employee’s performance. This technique demonstrates the manager’s ability to observe employee performance. However, it may be ineffective in driving the desired changes if the employee focuses more on the positive comments than on the areas which need to be improved.

Leadership/Management Accountability in Delivering Feedback

Whatever method is used for delivering feedback, it is critical the manager’s message is understood by the intended audience – the employee. The manager/leader must ensure the employee understands what is expected. Further, it is the manager’s/leader’s responsibility to remove barriers that prevent employees from being successful. If an employee needs additional training to perform their job, the manager must help to remove obstacles that would prevent the employee from getting the required training. Finally, the manager must monitor and communicate employee progress in meeting expectations. The result of following this technique at a minimum will be enhanced communication between manager and employee. To a greater degree, it will improve overall organizational effectiveness.

More information on delivering feedback can be reviewed in Corporate Leadership Selection: Impact on American Business, Employees, and Society (Authorhouse Publishing).

Feedback to the bi-monthly blog entry is always welcome.

What’s UP (Weekly, Hot, Applicable Topic Summary - Unbiased Perspective)

DELEGATION

Delegation is defined as assigning responsibility and authority to others for carrying out tasks. Delegation is also described as empowering employees to make decisions, and/or choosing another person/group to represent the leader in executing an activity. This blog entry will address the art of delegation and highlight some of the characteristics of both effective and ineffective delegation practices.

The Role of Leadership and Delegation

The pillars of leadership consist of: communicating a shared vision; involving others to execute that shared vision; monitoring and measuring progress in achieving the goals and objectives; and acknowledging and rewarding success in accomplishing the goals and objectives. These leadership pillars are all embodied within the techniques of delegation. Although the gist of leadership and delegation is to get work done through others, this leadership tactic serves additional purposes as well.

First, delegation facilitates employee development. On the job growth can be accomplished. Subordinates are given the opportunity to obtain first-hand knowledge and experience. Leaders, managers, and employees who successfully execute delegation activities help sustain succession planning and individual growth. Succession planning and grooming a successor is an important step for all leaders. Consider the fact you may hinder your own promotion potential if you have not developed your replacement.

Second, delegation demonstrates the leader’s confidence and trustworthiness of employees. Research has shown employees are more productive and effective when they feel valued. Employees develop a sense of value to the organization when they are involved in the decision-making and they are trusted to execute their role. Employees who are not involved in decision-making, or are not trusted to execute tasks are not highly productive; and may even have low self esteem and lack pride in their organization.

Third, effective delegation will enable communication. Once the leader has selected the individual to delegate to, the task must be clearly described. The leader must explain what is to be accomplished; what the expected results are; and why the task must be accomplished. The leader and the employee must then discuss the resources needed to accomplish the task (i.e. training, money, equipment, other employees, etc.). Next, the leader and employee should “agree” on the timeline for completing the task. This crucial step ensures the employee understands what the task is, and also confirms the leader has clearly communicated expectations. Note that the leader does not totally walk away from the task at this point. The leader is still accountable for the completion of the task, and must be willing and able to help remove any barriers that may prevent the employee from successfully completing the task.

Finally, the leader must acknowledge and reward the employee upon successful completion of the delegated activity. In today’s economic environment, rewards and recognition is not always of a monetary nature. Sometimes, employees are more satisfied with a day off of work; or more development opportunities; or public acknowledgement from the leader than receiving a few extra dollars.

Ineffective Delegation

The art and concepts of delegation may seem simple. However, there are a few pitfalls which may deter this vital leadership practice.

1. If a leader does not clearly communicate and define the task, the employee may not achieve the desired result (“managing ambiguity” is another skill which will be addressed at another time)

2. Micromanaging or over managing – not giving employees the opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge, skills, and abilities will de-motivate employees. Micromanaging also shows a lack of trust and confidence in employees. While some employees may be comfortable with leaders who micromanage, the majority of employees will seek career opportunities elsewhere. Sense of value and sense of accomplishment are big motivators for high-potential employees.

3. Encouraging or coercing employees to execute unethical, immoral, or illegal activities is wrong. Corporate Social Responsibility and leadership integrity have forged into the limelight of the business environment. There are legislative acts in place to curtail unethical behavior and lack of privacy such as: Sarbanes Oxley Act; HIPAA; FERPA, etc. Asking an employee to engage in an activity that violates these laws is unacceptable.

Implications for Leadership

Effective delegation can be the impetus for sustaining a productive, high potential organization. It can promote the bonds of trust and confidence between leaders and subordinates. Delegation will also enable and enhance communication.

A workplace environment that does not support or execute effective delegation practices may be unproductive. Some of the symptoms identified in such an unhealthy environment are: unmotivated employees who feel no pride or sense of ownership in their organization; frustrated employees who feel they are not given the opportunity to apply their expertise; lack of development and grooming for future organization leaders. These symptoms may also lead to the more common maladies and dysfunctional behaviors of employee absenteeism, tardiness, and turnover.

One final consideration on leaders who are “leery” about delegating tasks. Some leaders may feel if an employee is too successful in accomplishing a delegated activity, that employee may eventually supplant/replace the leader. Developing and grooming your replacement is part of a leader’s job. If you do not have a replacement, you may not be able to get a promotion to further your own career aspirations. Having highly successful employees should not be feared, but embraced. Some leaders may feel they do not have capable, competent employees within their staff to delegate important activities to. If this is the case, the employee is not the one at fault. The leader who hired the employee has possibly (probably) selected the wrong person for the organization.

More information on leadership and delegation can be reviewed in Corporate Leadership Selection: Impact on American Business, Employees, and Society (Authorhouse Publishing).

Feedback to the bi-monthly blog entry is always welcome.

What's UP (Weekly, Hot, Applicable Topic Summary - Unbiased Perspective)

Workplace Diversity - Across Age Boundaries

In June and July 2009, I addressed the issues around workplace diversity in terms of multiple generations within the workforce (The Changing of the Guard - Parts 1,2, &3). Those blog entries focused on workplace practices of age discrimination against employees over 50 years old. Those entries may represent research bias and a 'slant' towards elderly workers. This bias is possible in part because I fall into the 50 and over crowd. However, sound ethical research consists of reviewing an issue from multiple perspectives. I would be remiss to not provide the other side of this topic. As a result, this entry will attempt to discuss age discrimination in the workplace from the perspective of the younger generation.

Inaccurate Presumptions

When the term age discrimination is discussed, it is typically presumed that an older worker has been treated wrong because of their age. It must be noted that there are also younger employees discriminated against because of their age. Having taught multiple aspiring business leaders and managers during the past five years at the University level, the stories of disrespect and discrimination shared by younger employees are just as unethical, immoral, and horrifying as older employees - in some cases even worse.

Younger employees (i.e. recent college graduates; less than five years in their first job; age range approximately 21 - 29 years old) say they have experienced at least one of the following behaviors, attitudes or stereotypes at work:

> Their opinion on work-related issues is not valued or solicited;

> They are not taken seriously because they attempt to inject innovation or change;

> They are told that they do not have the knowledge or experience to be successful;

> In some cases, they are feared because they DO have the knowledge, skills, and abilitities to be successful that their older counterparts do not have;

> Their salaries may be lower than other co-workers doing the exact same job, and with the exact same responsibilities.

Upon Further Review

In my June/July 2009 blog, I also mentioned the fact that older workers would be hesitant in spending their discretionary income on products and services of a company who released them. It may be reasonable to assume younger workers would feel the same way about a company who discriminates against them as well. Young workers also have significant discretionary income. TV video games, music and movie sales, and cell phone sales can attest to the selling power of our younger workers.

In the prior blog, I displayed short-sightedness as I expressed my concern about effectively executing knowledge transfer processes with younger or newer employees in the organization. If technology and technological advancements provide a competitive advantage, and the younger workers have the appropriate technology savvy, knowledge management/knowledge transfer may very well produce the desired results. From my own personal experience, I can recall receiving on-the-job-training as a newer employee in the corporate world at the age of 21. I also recall successfully applying the business processes and procedures I was taught at the age of 21 years old. For me to think that I could be an effective employee at 21 years old over 30 years ago, and that today's 21 year old can not is narrow minded.

Implications for the Future

Similar to other forms of workplace discrimination, stereotypes based on age will continue to exist. Unfortunately, the amount of time employees invest in such behaviors and attitudes has a direct negative correlation in organization productivity and effectiveness. Many companies today are struggling with profitability(and survival). Business leaders must make every effort to implement and support a positive, healthy work environment which entails acceptance - regardless of one's demographic background. A non-inclusive work environment and organizational culture is counter productive. Aging is inevitable. Business leaders must ensure the knowledge management process includes all employees and values their opinions and ideas.

Any practices opposite of inclusion and valuing diversity will fail. Additional review and investigation of workplace diversity initiatives may also help leaders identify another potential 'point of failure' in operating a truly high potential and effective organization. More information on workplace diversity can be found in Corporate Leadership Selection: Impact on Business, Employees, and Society (Authorhouse Publishing).

Feedback to the bi-monthly blog is always welcome and highly encouraged.

What’s UP (Weekly, Hot, Applicable Topic Summary - Unbiased Perspective)

Identifying and Resolving Business Issues

This entry discusses the “art” of identifying, addressing, and resolving business issues. Every organization has unforeseen or unexpected issues and challenges. Failure in providing solutions to business issues may adversely impact the organization in terms of employee morale, productivity, and effectiveness.

Identifying Business Issues

I characterize business resolution as an art (as opposed to a science) because the human element is involved. Business issues are typically not a part of the normal daily operations. To resolve them, someone within the organization must initiate a response to curtail, eliminate, or maybe even escalate the issue depending upon a desired or expected outcome.

In today’s business environment, some of the prevalent business issues are:
• A decrease in profitability or stock valuation
• Insufficient communication on a newly-implemented strategy
• Turnover of talented people (yes, talented employees will leave a poorly run company in a bad employment environment)
• Lack of vision from the organization’s leadership
• Employee fear and anxiety as a result of corporate downsizing.

A business issue can be generated from both inside and outside the organization. A business issue may arise from an external variable such as an economic downturn; a natural disaster which may hinder normal operations and business continuity; or even a shift in societal perceptions of the business or the business industry (i.e. banking and lending institutions). Business issues may also arise from internal variables such as union disputes; lack of skilled employees within the workforce; or changes in employee morale.

One basic activity in problem solving is to identify the root cause of the problem. Implementing a business solution without addressing the primary cause will be expensive and potentially result in a re-occurrence of the problem. For example, hiring a new organization manager that is not a fit in terms of culture, values, and attitudes may negatively affect employee productivity and effectiveness. Resolving the issue may be more than replacing the manager who was not a fit. The root cause may be addressing the leader(s) who felt hiring this manager was a good idea.

Another example would be reducing employee accidents in a manufacturing company. Whereas ensuring the equipment and working conditions are safe will help, the main issue may be providing sufficient training on the proper handling and operation of the equipment. Every issue must be thoroughly investigated, along with its risks and opportunities, to accurately address resolution.

Employee Involvement in Problem Solving

Whatever the scenario, research has shown involving employees in the problem solving process has a positive effect on morale and productivity. First and most important, involving employees ensure those closest to the issue can offer resolution ideas from their first-hand experience. Second, involving employees demonstrates leadership confidence in their staff. Third, involving employees ensures that they have “skin in the game”, and a vested interest in an accurate, effective solution.

Failure in Solving Business Issues

Applying the aforementioned strategy will greatly enhance the probability of business resolution. Conversely, neglecting the strategy of involving employees will result in failure. Some other things that will prevent business issue resolution and adversely affect productivity, morale, and effectiveness are:

1. Focusing solely on solving the problem at hand rather than addressing the issue that initially caused the problem. Fixing the immediate issue while allowing the true root cause to remain is expensive. The same problem may occur again.

2. Every organization should instill a discipline of problem resolution which includes a common, systemic approach to problem solving. When a problem arises, all members of the organization should be well-versed in the organization’s process and policy toward resolution. This common approach will facilitate success because employees will have the knowledge and experience on delivering the common organizational procedure.

3. Finally, the organization must accurately assess the risks and benefits of problem solving and business resolution. Will solving one problem result in compounding another problem? Will solving a problem allow the organization to readily return to a state of business as usual? Will issue resolution of a business problem have a positive impact on employee morale and productivity?

More information on leadership and resolving business issues can be reviewed in Corporate Leadership Selection: Impact on American Business, Employees, and Society (Authorhouse Publishing).

Feedback to the bi-monthly blog entry is always welcome.

What’s UP (Weekly, Hot, Applicable Topic Summary - Unbiased Perspective)

Leadership Vision and Integrity

For some, the definition, role, and responsibility of the leaders of the organization and the managers/supervisors of the organization are blurred. The leader of the organization and the managers of the organization are not the same. One of the primary roles of a leader is to establish and clearly articulate the organization’s vision. This blog entry will highlight the importance of communicating the organization’s vision, and setting organizational direction.

Shared Vision

Leaders are visionaries. They envision a better tomorrow. They are also innovative. Leaders seek to change things from the way they are to an improved state. Business leaders monitor, measure, and analyze the existing state of the organization, and set the course for organizational improvement.

Human nature facilitates doubt, cynicism, and resistance to change. Because of this inevitable behavior, leaders must be adept in explaining why embarking upon a change in the status quo is in the best interest of all organization constituents (i.e. employees, vendors, suppliers, shareholders, community, etc.). As a result, leaders must communicate a “shared vision”- one that has value and benefit for all of those affected by the proposed change.

Leaders who ask the organization to buy into a future that will have an adverse impact on organization constituents are futile. As an example, a business leader whose vision is to increase shareholder value, but does harm to the environment – or society in general may fail. Moreover, a leader whose vision is to increase organization profitability by reducing operating expenses via employee layoffs will not be successful (in the long-term). Finally, if the organization leader’s vision is rewarding or fulfilling to only the organization leader or a select few in the organization, the overall productivity and effectiveness of that organization will suffer.

Leading Change in Times of Change

We live in a world of constant change. We are currently driven by a technology-based environment. Five years ago, maintaining business networks and social networks through facebook, twitter, etc were non-existent. Ten years ago, conducting business via webcams and international conference calls was in an infancy phase. Over twenty years ago, offshoring jobs to other countries with a workforce of arguably comparable skills, but lower salary and employee benefit demands had not been fully implemented.

In today’s business world, we expect our leaders to offer a shared vision for five to ten years in the future when the business climate over the next two to three years is uncertain. As future, aspiring leaders, you must examine past experiences (your own personal experiences as well as the experiences of others in leadership roles). What types of change have you envisioned in your personal life? What types of barriers did you overcome to achieve your objectives? How have you gone about soliciting support from others to reach a common goal? Having a feel for what has and has not worked in the past may serve as a guideline for communicating and leading future initiatives.

Involving Others – Seeking New Ideas

Leaders are also proficient at involving and empowering others to achieve a shared vision. Leaders recognize that new ideas and support for innovation can come from anywhere and almost anyone. Therefore, leaders strive on communication. The flow of information and the interaction between those who share the leader’s vision is essential. However, seeking new ideas and steering away from the norm also means taking risks. When taking risks, there is always a matter of trust and confidence involved.

As a result, carefully entwined with a leader’s vision and innovation is their credibility. Few things endear employees more than the credibility and integrity of the leader. As a leader, you must always do what you say you will do. If you have always kept your word, and established a pattern of successful innovation in the past, this will minimize employee doubt concerning the future.

Organization leaders with a high degree of credibility and integrity typically find themselves surrounded with employees who are proud of their organization; speak favorably of the organization to others; and feel a sense of belonging and ownership in helping the organization achieve the shared vision and reach what may otherwise appear to be insurmountable goals and objectives. Consequently, leadership vision and innovation can be achieved through communication, examining past experiences, involving others, and consistently performing with a high degree of integrity. On the other hand, not communicating (or miscommunication of) the vision, not involving others, or not acting with integrity is a guaranteed recipe for failure. Failure in implementing innovation may result in poor employee productivity, effectiveness, and morale. It may also result in a poor or undesirable reputation among the other organizational constituents. And these dysfunctional behaviors inevitably hit the organization bottom line and the primary organizational goal – profitability.

More information on leadership and vision can be reviewed in Corporate Leadership Selection: Impact on American Business, Employees, and Society (Authorhouse Publishing).

Feedback to the bi-monthly blog entry is always welcome.