Gravitas - the holy grail?

In reviewing the site statistics for this blog I am still amazed at the diversity of visitors. I cannot see who and I can see where the link is coming from. A lot come from Linkedin, which is not surprising at all, but an increasing number are coming from search engines, primarily Google, but not exclusively.

What is more interesting is that most of the search engine hits seem to come from searches about gravitas and how to develop it. In part this is because my blog entry on gravitas seems to have made onto the first page of results in many cases, but I find it interesting that there are so many seekers of gravitas.

I do know that it in my life it has been a common employee appraisal point when trying to explain why someone has not progressed as they would wish to. I wouldn't mind a pound for each time someone is told they haven't got the required gravitas or indeed they need to develop gravitas for the next promotion.

Unfortunately that is usually where the advice stops and the would-be success is left wondering what  to do?

So now I am wondering if there is something that could be done to help this? I see a number of coaches offering advice and I think I will trawl through and see what I can find.

It may well be worth trying to write a paper on this - would anyone be interested? Leave a comment or mail me if you would. Similarly if you have any good advice about gravitas then maybe you would be happy to share it here?

Yet another interesting avenue to explore :)

A Common Malaise

A posting from a colleague recently reminded me of something that was originally written in 1998, ie twelve years ago, but is still so relevant to today. It has been rewritten and editted many times and being a Brit the version I will include here is one that was reportedly included in The Times.

An Obituary printed in the London Times – Interesting and sadly – rather true

‘Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was, since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape. He will be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as:

• Knowing when to come in out of the rain;
• Why the early bird gets the worm;
• Life isn’t always fair;
• and Maybe it was my fault.

Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don’t spend more than you can earn) and reliable strategies (adults, not children, are in charge).
His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well-intentioned but overbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a 6-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.

Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the job that they themselves had failed to do in disciplining their unruly children.
It declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer sun lotion or an Aspirin to a student; but could not inform parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.

Common Sense lost the will to live as the churches became businesses; and criminals received better treatment than their victims.

Common Sense took a beating when you couldn’t defend yourself from a burglar in your own home and the burglar could sue you for assault.

Common Sense finally gave up the will to live, after a woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little in her lap, and was promptly awarded a huge settlement.

Common Sense was preceded in death, by his parents, Truth and Trust, by his wife, Discretion, by his daughter, Responsibility, and by his son, Reason.

He is survived by his 4 step brothers;
I Know My Rights
I Want It Now
Someone Else Is To Blame
I’m A Victim

Not many attended his funeral because so few realised he was gone. If you still remember him, pass this on. If not, join the majority and do nothing.

I think this just proves that some things just live on and remain relevant.

So much has happened since 1998, yet we are still facing the same challenge, maybe more so as the politicians and regulators dig their teeth deeper and deeper into things they understand less and less, but dare not admit that failing.

For any purists the original was written by Lori Borgman and can be found here .

In search of happiness!

This morning BBC Breakfast posed the question, "Is happiness a skill you can learn?"

They have set up a page with a three part challenge.

1. 10 minutes of daily mindfulness meditation
2. Writing down good things that happen to you and a letter expressing your gratitude
3. Doing one or more additional acts of kindness each day

The full page can be found here and has a work book and mechanisms for feedback.

In the current world and especially in January in the UK, which can be bleak, it is worth a try.

I will be interested to know if you think it works.

Sometimes you just get lucky!! A tale of two frauds.

This morning, just a short while ago, I had a look at my emails and found that I had bought two new PCs to be delivered to Leeds - I live near Hertford. The total was almost £2,500.

In the intervening period I have managed to successfully cancel everything, including my debit card. The only echo is that I am now without my main debit card for a few days, but otherwise I am unscathed.

The fraudsters were unlucky. Normally I do check my emails, but not until 7:30'ish. This morning however I woke just after 5am all bunged up with cold. As a result I took myself downstairs and had been dosing myself with throat spray and cold remedies, waiting for the normal family awakening. At 7am I woke my daughter and went to look at my mails. This was earlier than normal and lucky break #1

The first thing I saw was a confirmation that I had reset my safety password with my Bank - funny, I didn't remember doing this. That message was sent at 6:53am. Then I saw I had bought a gaming computer for around £1,800 from Best Buy - timed at 6:59am. Again this had passed me :).

I then found I had bought a high end laptop from Best Buy at almost £700 at 7:04am.

Luckily these were all very current. In truth the only reason I got the emails was that a) the fraudsters in the interest of making it look legitimate had used an email address using "thesutherlands.com" domain, one I own and administer. They had used Ian33, but as all unrecognised addresses come to me I saw these immediately, lucky break #2.

I quickly tried to find a way to contact Best Buy, but hesitated. I saw a contact number starting 0333 and wondered if the scam was actually to get me to call a premium number at some extortionate cost; the orders being false and intended to scare. A quick google told me that 0333 was OK, but Best Buy customer services were not open until 8:00am

So what to do, phone my bank or something else? I realised that I did have an option, As I had access to the email they set up I could reset the password and try to cancel the transactions. This I did. I reset the password, accessed the orders and cancelled them all by 7:27am. Lucky break #3 ie being so immediate and being able to reset and access the account.

At that point I phoned my Bank, who, once I explained matters, stopped the card - ordering a new one, marked the two transactions, assuring me that with the orders cancelled, that the amounts should not go through, but if they did they would be reimbursed, and also confirmed that there were no other improper transactions. This was completed by 7:45am.

At 8:00am on the dot I phone Best Buy who were very helpful confirmed the cancellations and closed the online account.

By 8:15 I think I had cleared the mess, but it had been an exciting(?) start to the day.

My wife's reaction was that I had left my card behind a bar to run a tab, but this was not the case. I realised that the fact they linked my card number to the right email domain, strongly suggests it was sourced from an online transaction. This just proves that while the technology may be secure, there are still weaknesses in the people who operate these systems - don't be complacent.

I will say that along with riding my luck, LloydsTSB and Best Buy were very helpful in resolving this little issue.

Let's see what the rest of today brings?

UPDATE:
Well I thought I was so clever and all I was missing was a plastic card for a few days. Wrong! I went to my bank with my cheque book to try and take out cash to tide me over until my new debit/cash card arrived only to find that the placemarks left by the two transactions, even though they had been cancelled, exhausted my account including the modest overdraft limit. The cashier told me that the cancellations from merchants often take three days tto process!!!

So, even though the transactions were fraudulent and cancelled, I could not get at my cash. It seems there is no way to expunged those holds on funds from the account. Instead they just have top "fall off" in a few days time. Seems a bit archaic to me, but I guess there is a reason.

Now the staff in my local Lloyds TSB branch were very helpful and within 15 minutes had set up an extended overdraft facility to cover the problem and cashed my cheque. What they did say to me is that they recommend using a credit card for online transactions, because not only do you get more protection against fraud, you also avoid this sort of problem with a cash account.

I guess I just have to wait a few days to get everything back to normal.

The Strategy Bonfire

This weekend I needed to make some strategic decisions and then formulate the related plans. As of Friday, I was confused and unsure, torn between head and heart, balancing security with future possibilities, and trying to choose the right path at what feels like something of a crossroads.

Before I go on, let me just smile at the title here. It reminds me of "the decision hedgehog" - just google it! - something that was referred to me a few years ago and is an amazing piece of opaque, academic gobble-de-gook. Looking at the results of such a google search, it would seem that at least some people at the LSE took it seriously. It defies my comprehension and would not survive in the commercial world I know, but if you want to see something different, have a look.

Now back to the core of this post. What I wanted to record and share is a personal belief that decisions have their place in time. Trying to force a decision will often result in a poorer one, though I concede not necessarily a poor decision. I find that if I take my mind off the subject and let the decision develop and rise to the surface of my consciousness, I usually make the right one.

The analyst in me sometimes argues for lists or pro's and con's, or maybe a decision framework, but then I tend to see both sides of the argument. This rarely brings the clarity that one might expect. It does however stop ideas spinning around in my head and at least this lets me start organising my thoughts.

For me, I have found that I need to engage in something totally removed from my normal work, something that is distracting, maybe absorbing in places, but generally without time pressures. In the past mowing the lawn or hanging wallpaper have proved useful. Yesterday it was building something akin to a Bronze Age burial mound of fallen leaves and trying to burn them that did the trick.

Now it only worked because the ideas had been percolating since Friday. I had in fact made a decision about three times in that period, but each time it did not feel right.

At last, in the periods while I watched the smoke swirl (you try getting wet leaves to flame!) or added another layer to leaves to the pyre, I managed to find an answer that made sense and felt right. Everything fell into place. It was not the "easy" option, but nonetheless it felt right. I am now able to create a plan on how to move forward and can now execute it.

The point I am making is that sometimes one needs not to push things, not to try too hard. Instead, step out of the environment where you are having difficulty, give yourself some time, allow your mind to play with the possibilities and then when you have something that feels right, test it. If it stands up to testing then probably it is right.

I know some people want and need to do this with another person ie "bounce ideas off" or "talk it out". For me it is a little quiet personal time.

I also tend to let this final decision "rest" (as you would a cooked piece of meat), usually overnight. In this time I don't dwell on it, but note how I feel about it. I may well also practice the words I will use to articulate it, either in my head or out loud.

I wonder how the reader makes such important decisions?? Wish me luck in this case! :)

Postscript: Having made and acted on the decision I have shared it with a number of people. In none of those tellings has I felt a shade of regret. I guess that says something and may be a test to be used in future as bad decisions can usually be unwound if necessary albeit at some cost.



- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Transformation - Leadership and Management

It is interesting what you find when you go through your drawers, well metaphorically anyway. The actual exercise was going through my old PC directories to see what was still interesting and relevant. I found the picture included below - reproduced here without any changes.

It dates from 2008 and appears to have been drawn in Visio, but I have no recall of ever creating it. Similarly I have no recollection of receiving it. As a result I can neither claim to be the creator nor attribute it to anyone else.

That said when I looked at it again(?) I thought it was quite insightful and worth sharing.

In essence it uses the ubiquitous 2x2 matrix with leadership (poor to strong) going up the y-axis and management (again poor to strong) going along the x-axis and looks at the likely outcomes of a transformational effort in each quadrant.

I suspect we could each define leadership and management, but for now I will use again the Kottor line

"Leadership is doing the right things, management is about doing things right"

As I read each quadrant I was struck by how true this was, at least in my experience with the firms I have worked for. Most seem to fall into either the top left (strong leadership, poor management) or bottom right (poor leadership, strong management).

Any effort that started off in the lower left square has typically had stronger management added and as a result stepped to the right. I guess that the problem cannot be with leadership, so it has to be stronger management that is needed? :)

I struggle to think of more than a couple of instances where I have seen a organisation or part of one occupy the upper right and quadrant. Something to think about, eh?

The Rise of the Machines? – Not on my watch!

I know I have stolen the title from The Terminator series, but on reflection it seemed appropriate.

In this context, the “machines” are those who hold dogmatically to a particular change methodology, adopting a “one size fits all” approach and batter those trying to deliver change into some amorphous, anonymous, unempowered mass. They do exist and often are people who when you examine their credentials may claim to have been change deliverers in the past, but rarely have any deep track record of delivery, let alone success.

I have written before about the rule of three which more generally means spotting emerging patterns, or at least one that are becoming visible. So, in the last few days I have spoken with a new contact who has long experience in the human side of change, spotted a group on Linkedin called “People deliver projects” and also been pondering how to expound better expound some of my values. These have led me to this post.

It may seem ironic that as someone who has developed and implemented three change methodologies in different places and built and transformed more than three PMO’s that I seem rage against the machine, but I have long championed the intelligent application of any tool I have designed or implemented. The mechanistic approach could be appropriate if one was dealing with multiple instances of the same change/project, but then, to my mind, that really becomes “business as usual”!

In the environments I have worked we have rarely had any number of similar projects running close to together, but instead a mixed bag to be delivered against a constantly changing backdrop.

The best articulation to date of where my head is goes as follows; business(even life) is the net result of a combination of people, processes and systems. Success is a usually derived from the product of these three elements. In my head they are distinguished thus:-

• systems really deliver efficiency (cost, speed, etc);
• processes deliver consistency or repeatability (if that is a word?); but it is
• people who deliver agility and quality.

As this world is increasingly inter-connected, complex and demanding it is, in my opinion, the last element that offers the greatest contribution to real, lasting and valued change. Despite this I frequently encounter those people with a singular focus is on either process or systems, often in the name of control or improved delivery. This rarely seems to offer long term benefits, other as a work creation scheme for those who write and mainatin manuals and generate more and more reports with excessive and spurious detail.

People are looked at as resources, like a meeting room or computer, that can be booked, used and then, metaphorically at least, discarded. They are often “pooled”, but to all intents and purposes untended and unnurtured; almost as dispensible as a writing pad.

Is this the way to treat such important contributors and is it any surprise that so many projects are deemed not to deliver?

I am not an anarchist, despite what the previous words may suggest. I fully respect the contributions of processes and systems in the delivery of change, but they have their place and the must be used intelligently and not to overwhelm the people charged with delivery.

I have often described what I do as human chess,

I get the right people,

in the right place,

properly equipped,

to do the right thing,

at the right time,

in the right way.

Process and systems can and do help me, but, if it comes to a clash, I cannot and will not let them get in the way of delivering what my customer wants and needs – not on my watch!

Note to self - Always preview your work!

I have just noticed that work I cut and pasted here from another blog did not look good. I had assumed that a cut and paste would work and in the editor it looked fine.

Well I have just gone through and fixed the five in question and I apologise to anyone who looked by and though "what a mess!"

Oh well. Live and learn.

EMA-I #5 - The Knights of the Change Table - Posted 7/1/11

As I open my last blog, I feel grateful to have had the opportunity to share some of my thoughts on the challenges we all face in delivering strategic change. I hope that this and my previous posts have at least provoked the reader’s mind to look at things again and, maybe, differently. I hope that what I have said makes sense, but if not then at least it may have helped you form and articulate some alternate views. The big thing, I believe, is to approach these matters with conscious competence, an open mind and with purpose.

As a conclusion to the series I wanted to bring out a few things that have helped me in through my career, more so in recent times.

The first item on the table is a quote from Peter Drucker. It is now the strap line on many of my emails and is a personal nudge to the functionaries, the jobsworths and the risk averse among us who hide behind pure process and add little to real progress. It goes thus:-

“Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things.”

Peter Drucker

Being a change agent and implementer of strategic change requires us to be leaders, something I am sure will come up again in this blog. Adding that strap line to my emails helps to remind me and others regularly of the need to push ourselves and keep an eye on “the right things”.

The second piece is a call to arms for the future. I apologise to anyone who has read this already in my blog ( talesofanactivemind.blogspot.com ), but I think it is worth a reprise here with what I hope is a wider audience.

Interestingly it comes from an advertising campaign for a spirit; in this instance Grey Goose vodka. I came across this in a magazine and it was a toast to “the visionaries who moves us all forward”. It goes like this:-

TO EUREKA!

TO A FUNDAMENTAL SHIFT

TO ASKING WHAT IF?

TO FINDING OUT WHY

TO SO CRAZY IT MIGHT WORK

TO THE GUTS TO TRY

TO SEEING THE INVISIBLE

TO FINDING OBSTACLES INSPIRATIONAL

TO OUTSIDE THE BOX

TO OUTSIDE THE LINES

TO TAKING SMALL STEPS

TO BEING AHEAD OF OUR TIME

I think it is a great toast for a change agent and something you may be able to take, at least in part, into 2011.

The last piece harps back to this entry’s title and relates to a code that helps set change agents apart, yet binds them together at the same time.

I value my integrity highly and look for the same in others. If my integrity is questioned, or I suspect another person lacks integrity it has a huge impact on the way we interact, and thus my ability to influence them. I have recognised a tendency to withdraw from such relationships. This is something I am now consciously watching for and looking to counter my own reactions in search of better outcomes. That said I think a lack of integrity is as obvious as a lack of sincerity and has a huge ripple effect across a group or organisation. While I cannot be responsible for the behaviour of all around me, I can strive to set the best of examples.

The reason I raise this topic is to introduce an example of finding inspiration in the strangest places. In this instance, it is a TV advertisement for a whisky.

As background I have found myself living what I have considered a chivalrous life, but without ever really defining what is, so when I heard this advert it hit deep. The whisky is Chivas Regal and the advertisement can be found on their website here
( http://www.chivas.com/en/INT/Campaigns/?item=0&length=L ).

I commend you to watch it, but if you do not have access to suitable browser I have a transcript below.

Everyone out for themselves

Can this really be the only way?

No. Here is to honour, and to gallantry, long may it live

Here's to doing the right thing, to giving a damn

Here's to the straight talkers who give their word and keep it

Here's to freedom, wherever you find it

And to know the true meaning of wealth

Here's to the brave among us

Here's to a code of behaviour that sets certain men apart from all others

Here's to us

Live with Chivalry!

This spoke to me deeply and clearly and I pass it in the hope it will do so for the reader too. I think that the best change agents are set apart from the rest. We should be proud of what we do and who we are and we should expect that of others.

I hope that I leave you in an enthused and positive frame of mind. We have a lot to do and many depend on us to be their beacon in a world of uncertainty. I hope to remain involved with EMA-I and also keep my own blog going as long as there are readers who find it interesting and worth reading. Please do drop by.

Best wishes for an exciting and rewarding 2011.

EMA-I #4 - The lessons we can learn from golf? - Posted 6/1/11

At the age of 29 and with no ball striking ability I took up golf. It had never featured in my family history of sporting skills, but I decided that I would try. Now, over 20 years later, I still play albeit not very well. In truth, I don’t play enough to really improve and it is, at times, very frustrating, but the rewards are high and I hope to be playing for many years yet.

Given it was not a natural skill set for me, I have had to work hard to understand and improve even to the levels I have achieved. To those that know golf, I can, at my best play, to a handicap of just under a 20. Among my inconsistency, I can hit some, though few, of the sweetest shots that out-play, better golfers. I can also hit some of the ugliest shots ever seen.

I thought that in this fourth blog I would reflect on some of the learnings from golf that I think could aid a change agent. I hope there will be an, “Aha” or a “Oh, yes” moment somewhere in here for each reader. If so then, please let us know. If not then, maybe you have some of your own to share.
As I sat to think about this, I came up with a long list of possible subjects, but here I have pulled out half a dozen or so that mean the most to me. Here goes.

#1 Be brave enough to challenge and go against “natural” logic
What do I mean by this? Well, when I started learning I knew I had to get the little white ball into the air and hit it a long way (well most of the time anyway). So my brain was ready to hit it up and hit it hard. I cannot tell you how many times I scuffed the ball and it scuttled along the ground for a short distance or indeed I missed the ball altogether. The number of sweet shots was less than one in ten and maybe nearer 1 in 25, more a case of accident than design.

Well, I was told at an early stage that I needed to hit my irons down into the ball, to squeeze the ball between the club head and the turf if I wanted to get it up. I also knew that good golfers created divots, the strips of turf that their clubs cut from the ground as they struck the ball. The trouble was while my ears heard this, my body could not accept and act upon the knowledge. It seemed so counter-intuitive to hit down and waste energy hitting the ground and cutting the turf.

I was also told that delivering power to the ball all about timing rather than trying to hit the cover off it. I knew that I should have a smooth rhythmical swing, and let the club head do the work, but again when I was faced with a long shot across a lake or similar, my body went back to “hit it hard”. My club head would hit the speed of sound. Any element of control was lost and I was lucky that the head stayed on the club. The combined effect for me was a few good golf shots and lots of frustration.
Looking back it probably took me ten years to overcome this problem and while I am still not a great golfer, and doubt I ever will be, I do strike the ball better and more consistently now, obtaining improved results by defying what my body took to be natural logic.

#2 Play the course, not the driving range - course management is key
There is a term in golf about “course management”. My understanding is that this is about playing sensibly and with purpose, thereby maximising your chances of success. Many golfers think that they will reach their peak hitting ball after ball in a safe, dry driving range that looks and feels nothing like a true golf course. In contrast, the real game is played on real courses, subject to a variety of weather conditions and where a difference of a few inches can be very significant e.g. you are in a ditch or you are not, you are beside a tree or behind it, etc.

Course management is about having a strategy that considers the strengths and weaknesses your game and those of the challenges of the course you are playing. This can be garnered from a book, by talking to someone who has played it or indeed practicing on the course beforehand. That same strategy will also take account of the weather and condition of the course. If it is wet and windy the course will be very different from a warm day with hard ground. A 200 yard shot one day, may only go 180 yards on another – possibly the difference of hitting a bunker or not.

Course management is also about adjusting to the way you find the course and indeed the way you are playing – we all have off days. If on your second shot you find yourself in the rough rather than the fairway, it may well be better to “take your medicine” and play a safe, but short shot to get back on track again rather than make it so you have to hit a “once in a lifetime shot”, that by definition will rarely come off and more likely end you in deeper trouble.

This does not mean one should never be brave, but rather that one should weigh up all the options and consequences and take the one, that at the time and at the place you are, gives the best chance of overall success.

This is not something you learn on a driving range or in a book, though these both have their place, but rather by playing real courses with a sensible head on. Can you see the parallels?

#3 The more I practice the luckier I get.
This is a much attributed quote within the golf world. I am not sure I know who said it first, but the context within which I heard it was just after a golfer, I thought it was Lee Trevino, but I may be wrong, had just holed a very difficult putt and someone commented that it was a lucky putt. The retort was along the lines, “It is funny, but the more I practice the luckier I get!”

The two points I would bring out here are that it is about the right practice and that accepting the help, advice and support of others is often a key element – practicing the wrong stuff in the wrong way can be just as damaging.

Most professional golfers will spend hours with a coach or coaches on practice facilities. Before a tournament, they will usually play the course two or three times, often hitting more than one ball from a variety of positions. They will also send out their caddie to scout and document the course so that they have the finer details of precise measurements, etc. for use if and when they are needed.
As an amateur golfer I don’t have access to all that support, but the principles are still true and the difference is self-evident if I have had the chance to play a course before, even if the conditions are very different.

In my change world, I have access to loads of experience and to training opportunities. I also look for ways to practice and test ideas and approaches before I need to use them in a critical situation.

#4 Be open to change yourself
This may be strange, but I have often found that some of the people most resistant to changing themselves are change professionals. In contrast when I look at professional and amateur golfers they are always looking for ways to get an edge. They look at and try new playing equipment regularly. They spend a lot of money on lessons and coaching. They keep up to date with rules and support accessories. They will try alternate putting methods, to rebuild a swing, and try new course strategies (for my part I leave my driver at home now and only use a driving iron!).

All in all, they are continually striving for ways to improve. In part this is probably because of the regular measurement of them against others, but it is also because they can assess their own progress by their handicap. The one thing few of them are and certainly none of the successful ones are, is complacent.

I am not sure how we can create that in the change world, but boy would it be powerful if we could.

#5 Don’t beat yourself up unnecessarily (when, in fact, you have done well)
As I have alluded to already, my standard of golf is not high, in large part because I am not very consistent. When I do hit a sweet shot, I can marvel at it like anyone else, but in the past I also had a common tendency to say something like, “That was great, but if only it had…….landed two feet to the right…..not hit that rough……left me a clearer line to the pin….etc.”

Psychologically, the word “but” means that our brain only keeps the bit after the word and forgets what came before. Many new and poorer golfers have this huge tendency to have a momentary high and then negate it with self-criticism, criticism of something they had no right to expect in the first place.

For example, if one is approaching a green from say 100 yds, a good golfer could expect to hit the ball onto the green maybe 80%+ of the time. A poor golfer like me might only achieve 20-30% success. Now for the good golfer, he can realistically worry about if he is left or right of the pin, uphill or downhill, closer than 20ft, etc.. That is a fair challenge. As a poor golfer I should be looking to lift my percentage up to 50%+. Until I can achieve that regularly, a good position on the green is a bonus, but not a realistic expectation.

The lesson is to set realistic targets and ensure you give( self-)praise where appropriate so that you can look to improve further. Avoid pointless and unrealistic criticism of yourself or others.

#6 Inclusion/involvement is a powerful tool
One thing that the handicapping system in golf allows is for a whole range of people with different abilities to play together in competition or just on a friendly basis. This has allowed me to make some very good friends I would probably never have met if this had been a purely skill based pass time.
More importantly it has helped me build bonds within the family. Before he got too old I played golf with my new father-in-law. Then I played golf with my wife and friends. More recently I have played with my daughter and at times with my wife AND daughter. These have all been enjoyable events and helped build better relationships while still improving my golf – everyone sees something different that you can learn from.

The relevance to change is that sometimes we can just get caught up in our own world, with our own terminology and a close set of friends. I want to set the idea that by casting our personal net wider, including and involving others can be hugely rewarding on many levels.

#7 We don’t have to be the same to be successful
This last one point for this blog is the recognition that we do not have to be clones to be successful. While in golf, each golfer shares the same goal, plays by the same rules and has the same constraints on the equipment he can use, there is a huge variation in the techniques and “swagger” employed by different golfers.

I will cast out a few examples that may resonate.

•  Jim Furyck’s swing is far from a text book example, but he executes it well and has been a top player for some years, culminating in winning millions of dollars in prize money in 2010.

• Seve Ballesteros was a master shot maker, arguably coming from when he learnt with just a cut down 3-iron and had to hit a whole range of different shots with a single club. He was a great of his time.
• Bernard Langer was one of the first to use a broom handle putter at the highest level and boy could he putt with it.

In contrast you then have the “man machines” that were Nick Faldo and Tiger Woods, but you also have the characters that are John Daly and Ian Poulter.

I could go on, but suffice it to say there is considerable diversity within the ranks of successful golfers. This is something we should not lose in change, even when there is a huge drive to put everything into a process, a tool or a methodology. Viva la difference!

Well, I hope in this post I have at least made you think. I do hope it is not too impenetrable for non-golfers.

EMA-I #3 - What makes a Change Agent - Posted 5/1/11

They do say that often less is more, and I think that this post may conform to that wisdom.

In this, the third entry of my week, I wanted to share something that I came across in mid-2010, though it was originally written over 10 years ago. I came across a reference to this work on a LinkedIn discussion thread and was so taken by the intent and content that I just had to go look it up.

To cut a long story short, a lady called Cathy Perme works out of the mid-West in the United States, in organisational development. She has run her own business for 20 years and in that time produced newsletters that have included interesting articles.

The piece that caught my eye was under the heading “you know you are a change agent when……”. In response someone quoted Cathy’s “Anatomy of a Change Agent,” which I have lifted directly from Cathy’s work and included below.

When I read it, I found it resonating strongly, and it gave words to much that I feel and believe. If there is a single thing I would change it would just be the word “scut” as I am not sure how international it is. My understanding of that term is the detailed, maybe hard and dirty work that needs doing sometimes e.g. roll your sleeves up and get on with it.

The Anatomy of a Change Agent

• A CLEAR MIND, one that is not cluttered with unresolved issues or unexamined motives.
• EYES that can see beyond today.
• EARS that can listen to other points of view.
• A NOSE that can sense opportunities and timing.
• A MOUTH that can speak out with honesty and respect.
• A HEART that can feel others’ pain and respond with compassion.
• A FIRE IN THE BELLY – a sense of passion and responsibility that makes one want to rise each morning.
• SKILLFUL HANDS that can do scut work as well as strategy.
• LIGHT FEET that can move swiftly when the timing is right.
• The SOUL OF A WARRIOR, with a deep sense of honor, perseverance, and patience, along with the willingness to act decisively.

I am not sure I could or would want to improve that succinct description so in this instance I leave it with the reader to digest and decide how useful it is. Instead I will leave you with the closing words of that article.

“There are real change agents working everyday in our organizations and communities. Being a change agent is not about personality. It’s not about leadership style. It is about awareness, conviction, humanity, and courage.”

If you want to read more you can find Cathy’s trove of newsletters at www.cmperme.com

EMA-I #2 - the "Alpha" Change Manager - Posted 4/1/11

The term “Alpha” seems to be something of a buzzword these days. While not always seen in a positive context, e.g. the term “Alpha male” can be associated with unwanted excesses, it is usually related to superior and consistent performance.

An example is my current industry of investment management where many managers seek to generate “alpha performance.” In this context it relates to absolute returns irrespective of whether markets are going up down or sideways; beta performance is about matching the market. As an illustration, in a market that goes down by say 8%, a beta manager who only goes down by 7% has beaten his target, but an alpha manager with a target of plus 5% has to achieve that or better. I know which I would prefer.

In project management there has been a search for the “alpha PM”, the person who consistently delivers better than average results. The chances are you have one or two people in mind who could qualify, but do you know why this is so and how you would have to develop others to the same level?
When you consider the reported statistics of how many projects fail or don’t deliver their expected benefits – I won’t go over that ground again - you can see the advantage of recognising these individuals and using them on strategic change.

I would like to bring two pieces of work to the table for consideration in this blog. These are the work of others and I will do my best to attribute them properly. If you are interested then, please look deeper and make your own assessment.

The first piece I want to bring out is work by a UK consultancy called PierceMayfield, a specialist in project management training and development. In 2008 they reported at a conference in London on the conclusions of an exercise they had coordinated and analysed. In this they had asked a significant group of project managers to keep diaries over something like a 10 week period. In these they tracked how their time was apportioned, what challenges they faced, and the outcomes of their work.

Although possibly not the most scientific piece of work they did come up with some interesting conclusions, ones which resonated with me and the audience. If I can do them justice after this time, the findings were:-

• All high performing PM’s had an inbuilt dashboard in their head that contained the four or five things they needed to concentrate ¬now. This is independent of any formal structured reporting tools or templates and differed from PM to PM, from project to project and indeed from week to week. The key thing was that had a keen sense of what was important and deserved their time, being able to give less attention to the rest. The question of importance itself varied by time too, ranging from stakeholder interest through to risks and issues. This brings out a question of judgement, which is something I will return to.

• The next differentiator they identified was that “alpha’s” had time to deal with the unplanned demands on their time, because as we all know, the unexpected always happens. This came from two behaviours, those being an ability to prioritise and the practise of good diary management. While the first is self-explanatory and links with the earlier point about an understanding of what is important, the second is different.

• The diary management item related to them always leaving space in their diary in order to accommodate the unexpected. They did not book out more than 60-70% of their time to committed activities, filling the remaining time as best suited their needs at the time. This is somewhat at odds with many modern practices where PM’s die under a burden of meetings aka “death by meeting”, and people feel obliged to be seen to be “busy” in order to justify one’s seat in the office. Who raises the boss’ eyebrow most, the person who mentions that are having to work 10 hours a day to fit all the meetings in and do their work or the person who, while still doing their work, is seen to have time for coffee and chat with team members, or is always ready to pick up the baton in a crisis? You decide. But then who is the most effective?

• The last item was about the context the PM was operating in. They concluded that while an alpha PM would remain an alpha PM his/her performance could vary as they moved roles and organisations. The reason cited was that much of their skill was in knowing how “to get things done”. To do this well they needed to understand their environment and have effective relationships with stakeholders and suppliers. If these changed then it would take a short, but real period of time while new relationships were built. In that phase, it is not that an alpha ceased to perform, just their level of performance dropped. In time an alpha could be expected to rebuild their superior performance, but it would be wrong to expect the immediate transfer into a new environment.

To me the learning points here were about awareness, judgement, self-management and the importance of relationships and that while these were transferable there would always be a temporary dip in performance as the alpha PM learnt and adapted to a new environment.

I know this blog entry is all about project managers and not more generally about change agents, but I feel the learning points are very relevant.

The second piece is some work with the Major Projects Association (MPA ) in the UK. A study was performed on a nominated group of 29 “elite” project managers from 17 organisations to look for key judgement attributes.

The tool used was one called the Judgement Index. This is built upon the work of a Nobel Prize nominee and looks to assess an individual against a reference model, bringing out the meaning of the measured variations. It looks at the how the individual sees themselves, sees the world and sees them self in the world. It can also look at the balance between components.

This is much more of a “living”, contextual tool as it is easy to see that how one might respond differently if one has just nursed a loved one through cancer rather than having witnessed the birth of a child. This assessment has, in my experience, proved very insightful.

The findings were presented at a conference in mid-2009, and many of the findings resonated with the earlier work. Key strengths/indicators were, not surprisingly:-

• Strong people skills, tolerance and empathy
• Excellent problem solving skills, both personal and work
• An informed decision making style
• Good trainability and a strong work ethic
• Strong systemic (big picture) judgement i.e. dealing with abstract problems
• Good ability to follow directions with accuracy
• A positive attitude and stress coping skills in both work and self-life
• A balanced approach to people, work, and systemic (big picture) issues.

What was more interesting was that the group also showed:-

• High levels of self criticism
• Low levels of self care
• Relatively low levels of qualitative judgement; quantitative judgement was much higher

The first two can have detrimental impacts on performance if found in excess. This is something for colleagues and managers to be aware of and mitigate.

Now no-one would claim that either of these was a perfect, scientific study, but I do think that each gives us an opportunity to learn and reflect on the make up of an alpha change manager.

Personally, I don’t doubt that there are those who are better suited to leading change, but I note that they tend just to emerge rather than be consciously nurtured. More work such as the studies mentioned here could help increase our conscious competence in identifying and developing the alpha’s of the future.

EMA-I #1- The "Usual Suspects" - Posted 3/1/11

 

It is with a mixture and trepidation and pride that I write this inaugural blog for EMA-I. There is a sense of responsibility that, while we will all bring our skills and special experience to the endeavour, the first few entries need to set a level or a tone for those that follow.

With that in mind I have tried to craft five related pieces that I hope will provoke thought, raise a few smiles (knowing or otherwise) and generate some debate, but as usual only the reader can judge if this is successful.
This first piece was inspired by a conversation I had with Jim Carras where we were discussing the target market/audience for EMA-I. Here Jim is very clear that EMA-I is looking to provide a resource, a support and indeed a voice for those charged with delivering strategic change in an organisation. My immediate response was, “Ah. You mean the usual suspects.”

These are also sometimes referred to as the “go to” people. As we discussed this, I thought it would be interesting to capture and explore that thought, so what did I mean?

Well, in many places I have worked, and I have now worked in 10 companies, there is a group of senior, though not top, managers who are the ones who are always approached to deal with a crisis or major (strategic?) change. Where this group has existed, change has been easier, though not necessarily easy, to deliver. With this in mind, it could be illustrative to consider the characteristics of this type of group and see what we can learn from it.

At this point, I am reminded of a cover-band near me call “The Innocents.” Their strap line is “The names have been changed to protect the guilty”. I say this as I hope to deliver the points I wish to make without embarrassing any individual or group of individuals.

So, having reflected on the groups I have observed and been part of, here are the six aspects I think have set the more effective groups apart.

They possess a depth and breadth of knowledge of the industry/enterprise with a sense of perspective.
In my experience, where such a group has operated well they have possessed and demonstrated considerable knowledge of the industry and indeed the enterprise. This shows both individually and collectively. No one person need know it all, but each knows more than their own “silo” and collectively they cover the whole. The knowledge and experience is usually a balance of that gleaned from the existing enterprise and elements from other related companies/endeavours, ie it is not all inward looking.

In order to deliver this, the group will typically come from what used to be called in the City of London, the marzipan layer, an allusion to the thin, but essential layer used in cake decoration. The outside of the cake is the icing (read top executives, ‘C’- level) - these have the sweetest life. The body of the cake is the majority of the business, the industrial part that does the work. Linking these two layers and making it work are the marzipan layer of senior managers. They operate just below the icing, are not as well rewarded/sweet as that top layer, but are critical to the success of the organisation.

 

They have an underlying spirit of friendship, affinity and common purpose.
I have also noticed that in effective groups there is a level of camaraderie that is increasingly rare these days. This does not mean that they are all best buddies, in fact it is better if they are not so there can be a level of creative and dynamic tension, but that in general they get on and share more than just their work.

Like the point made on experience, they do not all have to have the same link with each other, but within the whole there are groups and the groups overlap, like a venn diagram, rather than remain separate and possibly divisive.

In a recent group in the UK, the support of a variety of football teams, was an effective link, but it could be anything.

It also manifests in the respect they show each other. This does not mean they always agree and there are never any fallouts, but rather that they can respect each other’s knowledge, experience, perspective and contribution.

They trust each other and are trusted by others, senior and junior.
Linked to that last point effective groups can be seen to trust each other, not to second guess or politic against an individual or group. More than that members are clearly trusted by their executive and by their staff. This is not to say they have a free rein, but rather that they will do the right things, consider the necessary aspects and on balance come up with the best solution or approach.

Where this does not exist one sees a high degree of duplicated effort and demands for immense amounts of detail that could allow others to make the fundamental decisions, rather than look to understand, refine and endorse the work of the group.

There are “just enough” of them to give the necessary coverage.
Interestingly the best groups have “just enough” members to give coverage and representation. The composition is not determined by role profile or level in the organisation, but rather settles on the smallest, effective number. Attempts to over populate the group, and thus duplicate elements usually fails and often results in something like a cuckoo moment i.e. one member displaces another from the group, bringing the whole back to the right size.

The right size will differ from company to company, but I have rarely seen it work well with greater than 10 or so members and more frequently the group is smaller.

Interestingly these groups are often self-selecting. They emerge rather than be created, and this does take time – time many short-term focused CEO’s, COO’s, etc. do not feel they have!

There is a level of security and stability within the group to give them confidence.
The members are usually pretty comfortable in their skin and in their more general role. While you could say that this is a natural consequence of the previous factors, I believe it merits separate identification.

This sense of security allows them individually and collectively to challenge and consider new possibilities. Without this inner security, the group’s work will be stifled and stagnate, being driven by personal agendas more than the common good.

The significance here is a warning that if there are too many moving parts and uncertainties that affect the group, then its previous effectiveness will be impacted – something for top management to consider. As they say past performance is no guarantee of future performance.

They run outside the formal organisation and are self sustaining.
I would also note that such groups are rarely found on organisation charts. They have formed through necessity or opportunity. They cross normal, formal business boundaries and while supported by the executive team in general, the group is not responsible to a single C-level member.

In part, this is the source of their success. They do what needs to be done, but are aware and balance a broad set of interests.

The self-sustaining aspect is also useful. I have observed that the relationships and affinities are developed by the members of the group and not by an outside agent, by that I mean no-one is put in charge or given responsibility to make it all work. Instead the group finds its own division of labour and hierarchy, if it needs one.

 

When this group works, it works very well, providing pace, quality and confidence. This should be no surprise as in many ways I have described many recognisable elements of a high performing team.

There are, however, some downsides. Here are a few:_

• The “usual suspects” can become cliquey and alienate others.
• It can be difficult to introduce new blood, either by design or necessity.
• It tends to set a cap on the organisation’s capacity for change, i.e.How much can they handle as such teams are difficult to either scale up or duplicate – just watch a company try and do too much.
• Unless managed well the group could become indispensable and irreplaceable.

The lessons I would take from this, and these can be explored at some later point are:-

1. You can’t just manufacture such a group instantly by throwing a set of individuals together; instead you need to grow and nurture it.
2. There needs to be a core set of knowledge and experience relevant to the organisation and its industry if this group is to be effective.
3. No matter how “professional” this group is it still needs a level of personal security to be effective. This security will differ from person to person, but without it self-interest will triumph at the corporation’s expense.
4. Recognise and respect the group and foster it as you would any key resource. Too often it relies on unconscious competence, so make this conscious if you are serious about change.

Hopefully, some of this will resonate? If not, please contribute your thoughts and alternative perspectives.

 

EMA-I Catch Up

Well, as you know, I was invited to be the inaugural blogger on the EMA-I website. That was last week and it is gratifying to hear that because of the blog and other activities the levels of site traffic rose significantly.

I did not want to distract from that effort so resisted the idea of simultaneously posting the blogs here, but as my week is over, and in the interests of trying to keep my work in one place I will now post the five blogs here. For those that have read them then please skip by, but it is possible that this will find another audience.

The blogs now follow separately but, sequentially.

How to build gravitas - practical advice

How frequently have you heard the criticism that someone lacks gravitas? This is something that a successful change agent needs, but can you develop it?

I have been asked this a number a times, both as a manager of a team and as the head of a programme office looking at the development of change professionals. For a long while I had few answers. Now if they had asked about planning a project or manageing risks there was a huge armoury of texts, training courses and even practitioners to emulate.

Gravitas however seems much more elusive.

This was until I, after much searching, found a resource online, thechangeboard. I have provided the link below, but here are the 10 steps they suggest.

1. Think about your natural body space

Then imagine it is twice as great, then imagine it fills the whole room or street. Hold that thought and your body language will automatically increase your presence. 

2. Talk at a measured pace

Gushing suggests gullible; steady suggests wise. Don’t raise your voice: if you have presence you don’t need to.

3. When you’ve made your point, stop talking even if there is silence

People with presence don’t worry if it takes other people time to understand them.

4. Look slightly above the people you are talking with

 As if the point that you are making is more important than the reaction of the people that are listening.

5. If you’re having difficulty gaining gravitas

Change the role that you are playing, eg, if the other people know more than you provide incisive summaries or ask challenging questions rather than compete in an area where you are unlikely to shine.

6. Set the mood

Be the source of enthusiasm if the others are sombre, or the voice of calm consideration if the rest are ebullient.

7. Don’t talk over other people

Or, if you have to, wait until there is silence before you make any serious points.

8. Give your undivided attention when others are speaking

At least to start with (unless they cut across you in which case look irritated).

9. People with presence tend to say relatively little

But what they say counts – focus on quality rather than quantity.

10. Taking a few notes suggests that you are sifting the gems

Or having brilliant thoughts (high presence) but furiously scribbling will encourage others to see you simply as the note-taker.


I have shared this with a good number of people who have found this useful. They see it as offering real ideas they can do that will give positive and visible results. 


Do let me know if it resonates and/or you find it useful Similarly add your own suggestions by commenting on this post.


Here is the link, http://www.changeboard.com/content/1675/how-to-gain-gravitas/#

First day nerves

Today is my first day as guest blogger for the Enterprise Management Association www.ema-i.org and I have to admit to a certain degree if nervous doubt.

As the first entry in the blog I feel a degree of responsibility to set the right tone and encourage readers to return as other bloggers pick up the baton.

The idea behind EMA resonates strongly with me. It has grown from a group of people who felt that the existing project associations, such as PMI in the US, stop short in their support of those charged with delivering strategic change - that there is much more to this than a documented methodology and loads of training and accreditation.

I encourage you to have a look and, if it interests you, think about getting involved.

Here is a short cut to the blog entry http://ema-i.org/Default.aspx?pageId=869482&mode=PostView&bmi=486515


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad