Leadership methodologies are as unique as a handprint. Everyone seems to have their own way of leading. These leadership styles are born from our heredity, rearing, education and personality. In the same manner, those being lead, the followers, are motivated in countless ways. With all this variation in leading and following, it goes without saying that leadership skills in one corporate culture may simply not work in another corporate culture. This blog entry will address the topic of cultural incongruence.
Case In Point: Enron
Enron was a company on the move. Hailed as one of the top companies of the early 21th century, Enron was the place to work. Young, upwardly moving professionals were drawn to a culture of aggressive business strategies, generous compensation packages and a culture that celebrated itself continuously. Equipped with some of the brightest minds, Enron created a momentum seen seldom before. Each year, the company appeared to be moving to increased levels of profitability. In fact, for some it seemed to be good to be true.
Of course, as we know at this time, it was too good to be true. But as one reflects on the case of Enron, you must ask the question “How far down in the organization did the dishonesty and unlawful business practices go?” Were only the top executives aware of what was happening at the company or did the deceitful practices permeate much deeper in the organization?
In my opinion, due to the widespread corruption that was found in the organization, it seems virtually impossible that employees in the lower ranks were not at least somewhat aware of what was occurring. At a minimum, employees in groups such as finance, accounting, trading and human resources. The American public has tapes of traders who knew they were trading energy commodities at 40 to 50 times the rate as energy commodity prices before speculative trading began between energy companies ($80/megawatt vs. $4,000/megawatt).
With this background in mind for a company like Enron, lets now address the topic of leadership methodologies. Let’s speculate on the environment within the trading organization. How did leaders lead and how did followers follow within such an organization?
First, let’s address the topic of shared values. I believe those who worked in the trading organization most definitely had shared values with their leaders. I believe these values centered around proficiency in making the most revenue as humanly possible with little regard for the consequences of their actions on others. I believe the culture centered on top producers and rewarding these producers regardless of ethics and honesty. Leaders on the trading floor were followers of executives such Jeff Skilling and Ken Lay who appeared to focus on revenues and shareholder value above all else.
Second, how do you think those who did not subscribe to these shared values fare within the trading culture at Enron? For those in the utility environment who moved into the trading function, it must have been a culture shock considering the change from a utility environment to a trading floor environment. For those who were focused on maximizing revenue at any cost, the change was an easy transition. For those accustomed to the traditional utility environment where energy was traded to assist your fellow utility, the cultural transition likely did not work.
In conclusion, leading and following takes many forms in today’s business environment. When deciding on where you would like to make your mark on the business world, you should make sure to consider the business culture first in deciding on your employer. Otherwise, you can expect challenges ahead that you may not be able to overcome.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Friday, September 18, 2009
Leadership Through Quiet Strength
What types of leadership behaviors would one expect when describing an NFL football coach? My first thoughts would be loud, cocky, mean spirited, directive or punishment-oriented. While the NFL has many examples of football coaches who exhibit these behaviors, one must understand all NFL coaches do not fit such a mold.
Case in Point:
Tony Dungy coached the Indianapolis Colts to a superbowl victory in 2006. When interviewed after the game, Mr. Dungy in typical manner acknowledged his team, his family and his faith. While these acknowledgments were not that unusual, it was the way in which he did it. The words were delivered in typical Dungy fashion clearly symbolizing a quiet strength.
The question must then arise, how can a man with such a demure demeanor not only survive as an NFL coach but thrive in that role? The answer just might be found in studying basic business leadership theory.
While all people are motivated in different ways, most every person can think of at least one person who they saw as powerful yet gentle. As I have grown older, I have seen these traits in my own father. Yes, he could scare me to death as a child because of the “switch” or simply harsh words. Its been through the passing of time that I’ve seen both of us change and mature in various ways. Now, he gives off an air of confidence through a more quiet strength rather than harsh words. This approach to influence or leadership has helped to increase my belief in him and his abilities to assist when necessary. Actually, this concept of belief in the messenger is taught in management theory. According to Kouzes-Posner’s First Law of Leadership, “if you don’t believe in the messenger, you won’t believe in the message (James Kouzes and Barry Posner, 2007, The Leadership Challenge, p. 38). I would venture to guess Tony Dungy leads in a similar manner.
According to Sportswriter Michael Wilbon, Mr. Dungy is the “quietest but most credible man in football” (Kaminski, M. (2009, September 12-13). A Coach’s Faith, Wall Street Journal, p. A13). How interested that the Wall Street Journal would highlight those two characteristics together, quietness and creditability. Why would creditability be so important, especially in the case of Mr. Dungy?
Again, the relationship between exemplary leaders and creditability is more important than one might think. According to leadership experts James Kouzes and Barry Posner, “creditability is the foundation of leadership” (James Kouzes and Barry Posner, 2007, The Leadership Challenge, p. 37). In a world where the truth is often exaggerated or simply ignored, how can creditability be so important in leadership? It does seem that creditable leaders are hard to find. For example, let’s look at the Enron case. Wouldn’t one expect, a number of Enron employees were aware of major violations and improprieties at the company? If so, then why would these employees look the other way and ignore these behaviors. Unfortunately, its likely the greed of the day took precedent. Its also likely when asked about the creditability of leadership though that employees were placed in very uncomfortable situations.
Finally, it is clear that Mr. Dungy is a man who expects the best from his teams and from people in general. This statement is based on his recent statement concerning Michael Vick who he has helped through his recent jail release and reinstatement in football. Mr. Dungy is very clear about his disappointment that people are so weary of forgiving others when wronged (Kaminski, M. (2009, September 12-13). A Coach’s Faith, Wall Street Journal, p. A13). It is clear that Mr. Dungy expected the best of his teams when coaching. Again, management experts agree that setting high expectations is fundamental in seeing high levels of performance (James Kouzes and Barry Posner, 2007, The Leadership Challenge, p. 37).
Tony Dundy is an example of the many different types of approaches one can take towards exceptional leadership. Many have learned and many will continue to learn from his approach and influence.
Case in Point:
Tony Dungy coached the Indianapolis Colts to a superbowl victory in 2006. When interviewed after the game, Mr. Dungy in typical manner acknowledged his team, his family and his faith. While these acknowledgments were not that unusual, it was the way in which he did it. The words were delivered in typical Dungy fashion clearly symbolizing a quiet strength.
The question must then arise, how can a man with such a demure demeanor not only survive as an NFL coach but thrive in that role? The answer just might be found in studying basic business leadership theory.
While all people are motivated in different ways, most every person can think of at least one person who they saw as powerful yet gentle. As I have grown older, I have seen these traits in my own father. Yes, he could scare me to death as a child because of the “switch” or simply harsh words. Its been through the passing of time that I’ve seen both of us change and mature in various ways. Now, he gives off an air of confidence through a more quiet strength rather than harsh words. This approach to influence or leadership has helped to increase my belief in him and his abilities to assist when necessary. Actually, this concept of belief in the messenger is taught in management theory. According to Kouzes-Posner’s First Law of Leadership, “if you don’t believe in the messenger, you won’t believe in the message (James Kouzes and Barry Posner, 2007, The Leadership Challenge, p. 38). I would venture to guess Tony Dungy leads in a similar manner.
According to Sportswriter Michael Wilbon, Mr. Dungy is the “quietest but most credible man in football” (Kaminski, M. (2009, September 12-13). A Coach’s Faith, Wall Street Journal, p. A13). How interested that the Wall Street Journal would highlight those two characteristics together, quietness and creditability. Why would creditability be so important, especially in the case of Mr. Dungy?
Again, the relationship between exemplary leaders and creditability is more important than one might think. According to leadership experts James Kouzes and Barry Posner, “creditability is the foundation of leadership” (James Kouzes and Barry Posner, 2007, The Leadership Challenge, p. 37). In a world where the truth is often exaggerated or simply ignored, how can creditability be so important in leadership? It does seem that creditable leaders are hard to find. For example, let’s look at the Enron case. Wouldn’t one expect, a number of Enron employees were aware of major violations and improprieties at the company? If so, then why would these employees look the other way and ignore these behaviors. Unfortunately, its likely the greed of the day took precedent. Its also likely when asked about the creditability of leadership though that employees were placed in very uncomfortable situations.
Finally, it is clear that Mr. Dungy is a man who expects the best from his teams and from people in general. This statement is based on his recent statement concerning Michael Vick who he has helped through his recent jail release and reinstatement in football. Mr. Dungy is very clear about his disappointment that people are so weary of forgiving others when wronged (Kaminski, M. (2009, September 12-13). A Coach’s Faith, Wall Street Journal, p. A13). It is clear that Mr. Dungy expected the best of his teams when coaching. Again, management experts agree that setting high expectations is fundamental in seeing high levels of performance (James Kouzes and Barry Posner, 2007, The Leadership Challenge, p. 37).
Tony Dundy is an example of the many different types of approaches one can take towards exceptional leadership. Many have learned and many will continue to learn from his approach and influence.
Monday, September 14, 2009
The Push-Pull Fight For Integrity Within a Free Market Economy
Free market societies are based on a proposition that economic markets will control themselves with its own systems of checks and balances. From the historical writings of laissez-faire proponents (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laissez-faire) in the 1600’s to present day, forces have argued against governmental intervention in free market economies.
While few totally free market societies exist today, many democratic societies are based on free market concepts such as the balancing factors of supply and demand. This particular concept is key in that free markets allow new market entrants when supply lags demand and opportunities for wealth accumulation occur. In many respects, the US economy is based on this dynamic.
This dynamic of wealth accumulation can overshadow effective leadership practices and present challenges to senior management caught between the pressures of increasing revenues and the challenges of leading subordinates. The news media consistently provides new evidences of this challenge.
Case in Point: Pfizer
Extensive research by James Kouzes and Barry Posner provides evidence accumulated over more than 20 years concerning how subordinates gage effective leaders. In their book The Leadership Challenge, they present findings that show credibility as the foundation of effective leadership and honesty the key behind credibility (James Kouzes and Barry Posner, 2007, The Leadership Challenge, p. 32. 37).
So, what would cause a seasoned executive to stray from proven research that credibility and honesty is key to effective leadership? The answer is clear in that increasing pressures to generate revenues and profits from CEO’s and shareholders cause senior management to make value judgments they ordinarily would not make.
For example, the Wall Street Journal recently published a story about the Pfizer Pharmaceutical company concerning improper marketing practices specific to their painkiller medicine Bextra. According to the article, Pfizer was marketing this drug for so called off-label uses, or unapproved uses. As the article states, doctors can prescribe a drug as they deem appropriate but pharmaceutical companies can only market the drugs for approved uses (Jonathan Rockoff and Brent Kendall, September 3, 2009, Pfizer to Plead Guilty to Improper Marketing, Wall Street Journal, p. B2). The $2.3 billion settlement was the largest pharmaceutical settlement for marketing purposes in history.
When looking at this case, one must question who within the management chain of Pfizer knew about these practices and knew they were not allowed according to federal mandate? While one must speculate not knowing all the details of the case, it would not be beyond reason that many within the management chain knew of such practices but were likely tore between providing honest, values driven leadership and the pressures to produce profits and increase stock price.
While such leadership challenges will likely always exist, the level of true ethnics within a company will drive the frequency of such challenges.
While few totally free market societies exist today, many democratic societies are based on free market concepts such as the balancing factors of supply and demand. This particular concept is key in that free markets allow new market entrants when supply lags demand and opportunities for wealth accumulation occur. In many respects, the US economy is based on this dynamic.
This dynamic of wealth accumulation can overshadow effective leadership practices and present challenges to senior management caught between the pressures of increasing revenues and the challenges of leading subordinates. The news media consistently provides new evidences of this challenge.
Case in Point: Pfizer
Extensive research by James Kouzes and Barry Posner provides evidence accumulated over more than 20 years concerning how subordinates gage effective leaders. In their book The Leadership Challenge, they present findings that show credibility as the foundation of effective leadership and honesty the key behind credibility (James Kouzes and Barry Posner, 2007, The Leadership Challenge, p. 32. 37).
So, what would cause a seasoned executive to stray from proven research that credibility and honesty is key to effective leadership? The answer is clear in that increasing pressures to generate revenues and profits from CEO’s and shareholders cause senior management to make value judgments they ordinarily would not make.
For example, the Wall Street Journal recently published a story about the Pfizer Pharmaceutical company concerning improper marketing practices specific to their painkiller medicine Bextra. According to the article, Pfizer was marketing this drug for so called off-label uses, or unapproved uses. As the article states, doctors can prescribe a drug as they deem appropriate but pharmaceutical companies can only market the drugs for approved uses (Jonathan Rockoff and Brent Kendall, September 3, 2009, Pfizer to Plead Guilty to Improper Marketing, Wall Street Journal, p. B2). The $2.3 billion settlement was the largest pharmaceutical settlement for marketing purposes in history.
When looking at this case, one must question who within the management chain of Pfizer knew about these practices and knew they were not allowed according to federal mandate? While one must speculate not knowing all the details of the case, it would not be beyond reason that many within the management chain knew of such practices but were likely tore between providing honest, values driven leadership and the pressures to produce profits and increase stock price.
While such leadership challenges will likely always exist, the level of true ethnics within a company will drive the frequency of such challenges.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)