Tag Archives: strategy

Solid Leadership

Posted on by
1

Digital composite of Business man walking up mountain peak in thHave you ever noticed when you are feeling overwhelmed by a challenging situation, competing demands, or simply too much to do (or maybe all three!) it can at times feel like “mental vertigo.” Your mind just keeps spinning and you feel a bit off-balance from the stress of it all. It can become a vicious cycle that leaves you feeling dizzy and hesitant to take a step forward. But you are supposed to be the calm, cool and collected leader . . . so if you find yourself in such a situation, what are you supposed to do? Find something solid to move toward.

You may not have the answers to everything that caused your mind to whirl, but there is always something you can do to plant your feet on solid ground . . . and doing something is often the only way to stop the spinning. Stressing about the mountain you have to climb doesn’t make it any smaller (in fact, usually just the opposite), so find a foothold and take a step. The funny thing is, once you start moving forward, you usually find your balance and a path appears.

You’re likely not the only one in your organization dealing with mental vertigo. Helping your people maneuver up, down and around the many tasks before them without losing their balance is a key task of a leader. You need to serve as the solid footing, or at least a steady guide, to keep your people moving forward. How? Show them how to take a step toward something solid. Encourage them to break a task into small pieces and to move ahead.

Solid leadership is about forging a path and guiding your team, through the whirl of circumstances before you. It doesn’t mean you never feel off balance. It simply means when you do, you take a deep breath, find something solid to hold on to, and then forge ahead. It is not some mythical aspiration where you will always have the answers. It is about having a clear strategy for how to move ahead when you don’t. When you figure out how to remain calm and level-headed when the world is spinning around you, your people will too. That is solid leadership.

The Challenge of Leadership

Posted on by
Reply

Top View of Business Shoes on the floor with the text: Life BegiDo you want to grow as a leader, or are you satisfied with maintaining the status quo in terms of your leadership impact? Before you respond, consider this . . . leadership growth requires that you move outside your comfort zone.

When leaders achieve a level of success, there is a tendency to want to keep doing what has gotten you to this point. You know how to do it. It obviously worked. You have “arrived” as a leader. Why would you want to switch up your strategy now? Well, for starters, circumstances change and using an old approach to respond to new variables rarely produces the desired results. To quote Marshall Goldsmith, “what got you here won’t get you there.”

Leadership growth happens at the far side, the outer edge, of what you know. That doesn’t mean your experience and past success isn’t real and valid. It simply means that to increase your impact tomorrow, you have to be willing to challenge and adapt and stretch into the discomfort of not knowing for sure how you are going to accomplish your next goal — only that you will. In Learning Leadership Kouzes and Posner note that challenge is the defining context for leadership. If we didn’t have challenges, we wouldn’t need leaders.

So if challenge is the defining context for leadership, then real leadership cannot be about “getting there” or reaching a comfort zone. It is about finding a way through gnarly problems on the path toward incredible opportunities. It’s about growing and stretching and striving for more. It is about stepping into uncharted waters because reaching the destination is worth the risk.

Does every leader occasionally have fantasies about changing the world from the cozy confines of their comfort zone? Probably. And it’s fine — smart even — to hang out in that space every once in a while, to catch your breath and recharge your engines. Ultimately, however, to increase your leadership impact, you have to stand on the edge of uncertainty and decide move forward. Because when you step outside of your comfort zone, when you commit to taking on the leadership challenge before you, you chart a course that allows your team to also move forward . . . providing the opportunity for them to stretch and grow on the path toward organizational success.

The choice to stretch into the uncertainty is yours to make. That is both the comfort and the challenge of leadership growth.

The Fourth Quarter

Posted on by
1

Basketball JumpI spent last evening cheering on my former high school, and my nephew’s current, basketball team in a post-season tournament. They led throughout the first half of the game, but unfortunately the momentum changed a bit in the third quarter, and they just couldn’t quite pull it out at the end of the game. As is often the case, it all came down to the fourth quarter. They played hard, they never gave up, and when the buzzer sounded they ended up just short of their goal.

Those are the hard loses for a coach, or a leader . . . when early in the contest it looks like the win is within your grasp . . . and then something happens. Maybe someone else caught a lucky break or used a strategy you weren’t expecting. Maybe your team struggled or was just a bit off their game. Maybe the officials/oversight bodies suddenly started calling things differently . . .

Regardless of the unexpected variables that may come your way, it all comes down to the fourth quarter . . . when you’re tired and probably a bit out of breath . . . when you are trying to make adjustments and communicate with your team while running at full tilt . . . when you feel the pressure bearing down on you, and the roar of advice/encouragement/criticism “they” are shouting at you. It can be exhausting and exhilarating, and how you handle the pressure can determine the results of the game.

So how do you prepare for the fourth quarter?

It starts with the fundamentals. Can your team move the ball down the court? Have they practiced enough to anticipate what needs to happen and where they need to be at any given moment? Does the team support each other when one of them is being double-teamed?

You have to know the game plan. It is the job of the leader/coach to set the strategy based on a whole host of variables. What “starting line-up” is the best match for the task at hand? What should the pacing look like? How will you re-group if things aren’t going as planned?

It takes endurance to finish strong. How many times have you witnessed an effort that just simply ran out of steam? Things started strong and appeared to be going well, but over time became sluggish? Unexpected distractions took extra energy or a turn of events just took the wind out of your sails? Does your team have the reserves to dig deep to bring it home?

Of course, you can do all these things and sometimes the fourth quarter still doesn’t go your way, but in the words of famed basketball coach John Wooden, “A man who is afraid to risk failure seldom has to face success.” Start with the fundamentals, know the game plan, finish strong. . . then learn from the risks, and enjoy the rewards, of the fourth quarter.

Teaching Your Team to Play Chess

Posted on by
Reply

Playing chess game. defeating the Queen.I have written before about the importance of knowing how to play chess — mastering the art of placing organizational “chess pieces” in pivotal positions in preparation for future impact. In today’s ever more complex world (yes, it really does feel like you are now playing against three different opponents at once), it is not enough to have a single leader master this long-term game of skill and strategy. Now more than ever, you need to teach other organizational leaders to play chess as well.

According to a recent article in strategy+business, in a study of 6,000 senior leaders only 8% of those individuals rated as strategic leaders. Eight percent! Yes, that would appear to mean the odds are stacked against having more than one strategic leader in a single organization. However, all hope is not lost! There are steps you can take to build a strategic culture within your organization. Think of it as chess lessons. Not everyone will enjoy it or become an expert, but at least they will understand the rules of the game.

Lesson #1: Everyone needs to know the end goal. When you are transparent about where you are going, your people can do a better job of helping you get there. In the military, the concept is known as “commanders intent.” It came about because in combat (or in today’s challenging environment) things rarely go exactly according to plan. If squad leaders don’t know the ultimate goal, they might make a decision that makes perfect sense given their limited information, but could ultimately undermine the larger intent. Let your people help you be successful by making sure they are clear on the end goal.

Lesson #2: Encourage new solutions. As a general statement, those closest to the “front line” can often see solutions that may not be considered by those with a different vantage point. Is such input encouraged, or is it squashed by those with more experience or expertise? Discounting input because of who is offering it closes the door on a potential strategic advantage under the mistaken assumption that those who have done something longer can see it more clearly. Fresh eyes can observe a lot of things that those who see something every day overlook.

Lesson #3: “Failure” needs to be seen as part of the process. No one wins at chess without losing a few pieces along the way, and your team will never try to play the game if they get penalized for what, in effect, is part of the process. Make it safe to try something, tweak it as needed, and try again. The only way that is a failure is if you stop the first time something doesn’t work as planned. Make adjustments an expected part of the process and you will foster creative problem solving among your team.

Teaching chess takes time, but the fundamental steps above are a good place to start.

Frame It

Posted on by
Reply

Colorful Paper Clip With Pile Of Paper Reports Arranged On Table

Think of the forests that would be standing today if not for weighty strategic plans — you know, those tomes that come from months of time consuming effort, the result of which is so thickly detailed that some poor soul is likely to strain a muscle lifting its numerous pages onto a shelf . . . where it will sit collecting dust until a few years down the road when the process starts all over again. Save the tree.

I absolutely believe that good strategy is critical for organizational success. I also happen to believe that most strategic plans are outdated before they ever hit said shelf (and they stay on the shelf for that very reason) because they are built around a specific set of variables that can change at the drop of a hat. So if strategy is critical, but strategic plans don’t work, what is a leader to do? Frame it.

A strategic framework identifies a few (like two or three) main areas of focus and a small number of indicators of success. That’s it. It identifies what you are working toward, and how you will know when you get there, but does not define (plan) the how. That happens along the way. Yes, I realize a number of readers who really like black and white details just started twitching. Hang with me . . .

A strategic framework applies the concept of emergent strategy, where ongoing observation, reflection and feedback enable leaders to adapt their actions as needed in response to changing variables to most effectively reach the intended goal. Re-read that sentence. You’ve got to admit, it really does make a lot of sense. Things are going to change on the way to your vision, so why would you want to put huge amounts of time into developing a plan that acts like they won’t?

In addition, the brevity of a strategic framework allows for much greater clarity of focus. How much easier is it for your staff to remember two key areas of focus than it is to remember a 47 point plan? How much more powerful is a targeted one page document than a ream of objectives, tactics and additional sub-points. Which do you think is going to excite your staff, and make them want to get on board with where you’re going?

Don’t be fooled. A boiled down, targeted framework takes effort to develop. Clarity of focus, simply stated, takes discipline, it is hard to achieve . . . It is also powerful, and motivating, and provides the direction staff need to continually adapt to a volatile environment and still reach the end goal.

The strategy is simple. Ditch the plan, save a tree, identify your destination . . . And frame it.

The Trouble with Lines in the Sand

Posted on by
Reply

We’ve all encountered leaders who quickly and frequently draw lines in the sand. The minute an apparent conflict/issue/opportunity arises, they vigorously proclaim something along the lines of “We absolutely will/will not (fill in the blank)” . . . “Under no circumstances will we . . .” You get the picture.

The trouble with reactionary lines in the sand is that they are an emotional, rather than thoughtful response, that usually have more to do with the illusion of control than a realistic strategy. Sure, there may be a momentary rush in defiantly and idealistically staking out a position . . . a rush that can quickly be deflated when held up to the tedium of details and feasibilities. (Note: Constructing a suitably pithy response in your head is fine, as long as it stays in your head . . . but that’s a blog for another day.)

How much better is it for a leader to ask for an explanation of an alternate perspective, to gain a better understanding why someone is proposing a particular course of action, rather than make assumptions that the other person just doesn’t know what he or she is talking about? Giving someone a chance to make their case, and taking your time to draw a conclusion, doesn’t make you weak or non-committal . . . it makes you smart. You ultimately may not agree with the alternate viewpoint, or you may think it omits critical variables, but if that is the case then be grateful that you are better prepared to respond in a thorough, thoughtful manner. Or, once you understand the person’s end target, you may be able to offer an alternate solution that can meet both of your goals. Even after going through this process, you may end up exactly where you started. That’s okay. By allowing someone to be heard, and considering a variety of viewpoints, it will be easier to gain buy-in and minimize resistance for your ultimate decision.

“Drawing a line in the sand” is really a rather strange metaphor when you think about it. From a literal standpoint, can you think of a line less likely to be sustained over time? One big wave or high tide will wash away even the most fervently drawn line when it is placed on ever-shifting sand. (Although, some of the pronouncements I have heard from those quick to take a stand have faded away almost as quickly.) I prefer to draw my lines on solid ground. Does it take longer? Yep. It takes more effort, too. But it is also more likely to stand the test of time.

Bird Dogging Strategy

Posted on by
Reply

hunting dog -man hunter and curly coated retriever isolated on white backgroundWhen I was growing up, my dad always had a bird dog. When the dogs were little, Dad would work with them, fine-tuning their natural instincts until all he had to do was send them off in the right direction and let them follow their sense of sight, smell, their inner compass and quick reflexes to flush out the best opportunities (which in this case was probably a covey of quail).

Oh, if organizations could be so nimble when it comes to strategy. Well actually, they can be, but most aren’t. Somehow, far too many organizations have connected strategy with such rigidly quantifiable plans that they rarely consider, much less capitalize on, unexpected opportunities that maybe rustling around in the grass right next to them. Think about it . . . is it really realistic to know, in specific detail, what you should be doing three years down the road?

Let me be clear, I think a solid strategy is critical for organizational success, however I believe a strategic framework that provides direction, rather than a highly detailed strategic plan that dictates specific action, is much more conducive to optimizing impact in an ever-changing environment. What exactly does that mean? For example, a strategic framework might reflect the goal of collaborating with another organization or organizations related to integrated health, or developing new community-based programming, or geographic expansion, or revenue growth. All of these provide a direction, and you can measure whether you accomplished these things, but they also encourage on-going scanning of the environment regarding the best opportunities in these strategic directions.

I’m not alone in my skepticism related to “traditional” strategic planning. In his article “The Big Lie of Strategic Planning” (Harvard Business Review, Jan-Feb 2014), Roger Martin contends that developing a detailed plan maybe a great way to cope with fear of the unknown, but it’s a terrible way to make strategy. Discomfort and the unknown, and I would add nimbleness and instinct are part of the strategic process. In other words, sometimes on the journey to an intended goal, you end up following an entirely different path than you might have intended . . . and you’ll only find that path if you have the flexibility to follow an unexpected trail or two along the way.

Which brings me back to Dad’s bird dog. As the “governing body” of the enterprise, Dad made sure the dog didn’t get too far afield, but he also encouraged the pup to sniff out possibilities before focusing in on point. The process wasn’t always neat and tidy, but it certainly was effective . . .

… Maybe more of us should consider bird-dogging strategy.

Calling All Elephants

Posted on by
Reply

ElephantIn virtually any leadership team, no matter how high functioning, there will be times when the group is hesitant to bring up a question or concern. Perhaps it is because the topic is something about which the leader is passionate, or really committed to making happen. Maybe they feel like a decision has already been made, or the organization is “too far down the road” to change course, or that sharing a concern will undermine a relationship they have with someone else on the team. Regardless of the cause, an attuned leader may sense the caution in the room, but not be able to put a finger on the source of the unease. It is times like these that a team needs someone who is willing to “name the elephant in the room.”

I am blessed to have a member of my leadership team who willingly takes on this role. She is rarely the first one to speak up, but when she senses people are dancing around something that is weighing on them, she will either name the issue if she knows what it is, or point out that she senses some hesitancy and asks about it. She is able to do this in a supportive, non-confrontational way that makes it feel safe for people to speak their mind. (Not that speaking their mind is usually a problem with my team, but you catch my drift.) Her simple acknowledgement or inquiry has the effect of almost instantly making the conversation more “real”. You can almost feel the room take a deep breath because questions or concerns can now be openly discussed. At times, with additional information, the concerns are allayed. Other times, we tweak the direction or change course all together based on the conversation. In virtually every case though, we all leave the meeting feeling better about it. There is no need to have a “meeting after the meeting” because we addressed the concerns where they should be addressed — amongst the entire team.

If you don’t have someone on your team who naturally assumes this role, why not assign the task of naming the elephant in the room? If it has been assigned to someone, there won’t be the hesitancy of speaking out of turn … they are simply doing what you asked them to do. The effect is the same whether the elephant namer is a voluntary or assigned role. You as the leader have an added layer of protection against unnamed undercurrents that could ultimately undermine your efforts.

One note of caution … This strategy only works if the leader is willing to hear and respond to feedback, even when that feedback messes with well-laid plans. Elephants only come out to play when it feels safe to do so. And if an elephant gets shot down in an embarrassing or derogatory way, don’t expect other ones to show up at future meetings. They’ll instead decide to dance around amongst small groups after the meeting.

In today’s complex, fast-paced, circus of a world, it takes everyone’s best thinking to achieve the optimum outcome. And sometimes, you can only get to that best thinking by seeing, and naming, the elephant in the room.

Maybe the Plan is the Problem

Posted on by
1

business

I have been doing a lot of thinking of late about strategy and innovation, and how to use these tools to extend our organizations’s mission reach. Both concepts have been widely explored, and yet in some experts’ attempts to create step by step guides for how “do” strategy and innovation, the intuitive/explorative part of the journey gets lost in the quest to quantify.

I am a big believer in detailed plans … at the right place and time. I just don’t happen to believe strategy or innovation are the right place or time. As I mentioned in a previous post , our strategic framework (not plan, framework) fits on one page, and our most innovative efforts have taken us down paths we didn’t expect at the outset. If we had over planned in either of these areas, we would have set targets far short of what we actually accomplished.

You don’t have to take my word for it. In “The Big Lie of Strategic Planning” (Harvard Business Review, Jan/Feb 2014) author Roger L. Martin outlines why over planning is terrible for strategy. He contends that plans are how organizations cope with fear, but fear and discomfort are an essential part of strategy (whew, that’s good to know!). If fact, he says, if you are totally comfortable with your strategy, it probably isn’t very good.

Likewise, in terms of innovation, the authors in the newly released book Collective Genius note that innovative groups act their way forward rather than plan their way forward. You can’t move systematically toward a new concept, it is a journey of trial and error, gut instincts and new discoveries. How can you definitively plan for that?

While detailed plans for strategy and innovation may be counterproductive, you still need goals and parameters to keep everyone moving in the same direction. For example at the time we identified a strategic goal of extending our mission reach internationally, the intent — the what — was clear. However, if we had made a specific plan for “how”, we probably would have identified a single country to target, and called the plan a success if we met that target. Rather, by leaving the goal open-ended, and intuitively pursuing a variety of paths that presented themselves, we have trained professionals from five continents.

Our philosophy around innovation is that the specifics are going to change along the way anyway, so we start with concepts and prototypes rather than a comprehensive plan, and tweak it all along the way as we learn what works and what doesn’t. Patient persistence, rather than a perfect plan, is what has led to our most impactful innovations.

Strategy and innovation are never sure bets, there is always risk involved. A detailed plan, in effect, means you are choosing a single path and ruling out other variables and options — in many regards actually increasing your risk of missing the mark. As Martin notes, the goal of strategy (and I would add, innovation) is not to eliminate risk, but to increase the odds of success.

Not getting the success you hoped for in your strategy or innovation efforts? Maybe the problem is in your plan.

Stepping Out on Faith

Posted on by
Reply

steppingoutinfaith

“When you get to the end of all the light you know and it’s time to step into the darkness of the unknown, faith is knowing that one of two things shall happen: either you will be given something solid to stand on, or you will be taught how to fly.” ― Edward Teller

As much as people like to think that leadership is about vision and strategy and building a solid culture and high-performing teams — which, of course are all part of it — there seems to be far less focus on the role that faith plays in effective leadership. While some use the term more generically, as in “I have faith (confidence) in my team to make the best decision”, I believe for many leaders faith from a spiritual sense is also a key driver in their success.

For me, these two types of faith are intertwined. Faith in my people comes from experiencing first-hand their commitment to our clearly articulated values and operating practices (SMAC me), which are built on a foundation of faith. While having confidence in my team is important, I don’t think that is the kind of faith that Edward Teller was referring to in the quote above. Rather I think he is talking about the nudges, the feeling in your gut (divine guidance), the tug on your conscience that compels you to make a decision, even when you don’t know exactly how that decision will play out.

In my experience, you often have to “step into the darkness” before a door will open, or a path will be made clear. For leaders who like to be in control of a situation (that’s not just me, right?!?) making a decision to take a leap into the unknown can cause more than a few sleepless nights. I absolutely believe that when I seek His guidance, God will provide. I also believe He expects us to do our part — which to me means planning, considering scenarios and financial implications, etc. Unfortunately, it’s a bit trickier to figure out when you have reached the threshold of “doing your part.” Because sometimes (okay many times) stepping out in faith involves a fairly healthy level of risk. It is one thing to take that type of risk for yourself, but leaders often have to take such risks on behalf of their board, their staff, and all who turn to them for care — which is an even heavier responsibility.

So how do you know if the tug on your conscience really means you are being called to step out in faith? While I make absolutely no claim of being an expert, in my experience when there is something that you really don’t want to do, and you have done everything you can to rationalize a different course of action, and your gut still won’t quiet down, it’s time to step out in faith. Some of my most “visionary” decisions really weren’t so much about MY vision as the confidence that there was a plan, which would become clear if I would just move forward along the path.

Is it time for you to take that step?