Sterling Performance

Wall Street has moved seamlessly from greed to fear. Fear is contagious. Fear of being downsized, rightsized, offshored, bestshored, re-engineered, let go or plain fired is on the rise in Main Street as well as on Wall Street. Success is no longer measured in promotions, bonuses and pay rises. Success is called survival.

To survive, you need to make sure that when the cuts come, others are cut before you are. You have to make it hard for your boss to hit the ‘delete’ button when he sees your name. From previous recessions, four principles quickly separate the survivors from the unemployed.

• Be positive. In a world where jobs are complex and ambiguous, it is often hard to identify individual performance. Style counts as much as substance.
  • Be positive when everyone else is gloom-mongering.
  • Look for solutions where others find problems.
  • Focus on the future not on the past.
  • Be supportive rather than play the blame game when things go wrong. Your bosses will find it much easier to fire the negative, problem focused people first.

• Be proactive. This means working harder, which is better than having no work at all. Volunteer for discretionary work, special projects. Make yourself useful to the boss, and make yourself visible to the rest of the organisation. Bosses find it very easy to fire the invisible people: if they can’t be seen, they can’t be missed.
• Be professional. You have to deliver on results and on promises.
• Build your networks inside and outside the organisation. Inside, make sure you have a sponsor at least two levels above you who will look out for you. Make yourself useful to your sponsor. Make sure you are in the grapevine so that you know what opportunities and risks are emerging.
  Externally, manage your network so that you can remain aware of potential openings elsewhere. Help head-hunters if they call. Over 70 per cent of people who find jobs after being let go find them through their personal networks. Your external network is your insurance plan if all goes wrong internally.

There are also two ways of becoming cannon fodder and getting fired.

• Be unlucky. In the wrong place at the wrong time, even the best people will lose out. But if you are really good, you should at least be able to find work elsewhere.
• Be disloyal. Surprisingly, most bosses are reasonably forgiving of most failings. They recognise that humans are not perfect. But the one unforgivable sin is disloyalty. Badmouthing the boss around the water cooler, failing to support the boss in a critical meeting, briefing against the boss are great ways to destroy the basis of trust on which all relationships depend.
  Once the trust has gone, there is no way back: you will be the first through the exit door when the time comes.

(Photo: Orangeacid, CC2.0)

Employers aren’t getting the type of training their employees most value, according to the CIPD. Its 2008 “Who Learns at Work?” survey, the third in a series that began in 2002, has found that practical, supported learning, where employees are shown how to do something, then be given an opportunity to practise it, is the preferred option for 46 per cent of respondents, with 16-to-24-year olds particularly in favour of hands-on training methods.

This fits with the general trend towards more individualised personal development plans.

Yet the majority of training courses still take place in the classroom. (Yet the majority of the 751 people surveyed this year were positive about the training they’d already received, so clearly any training’s considered better than none at all.)

Training providers should try harder not to shoe-horn people into a prescribed format that may not suit the business’s needs, says CIPD adviser Martyn Sloman.

“Trainers are no longer the sun around which learner planets revolve. Employees have a firm preference for more active learning opportunities. They certainly don’t like solitary or unsupported learning.”

For their part, employers need to allow trainees the space to learn and practise new skills without being afraid of making mistakes.

Increasingly, though, responsibility for training decisions has shifted from HR to the line manager — the percentage of respondents whose manager was in charge of initiating training has risen from 45 per cent in the last CIPD survey in 2005 to 49 per cent today.

This makes the role of the manager as talent developer even more pivotal and  powerful — a dangerous place for toxic managers who play favourites, hold people back for fear of being shown up, or are just bad communicators.

They should be first in line for training. Good managers should have a head-start when it comes to show-and-practise techniques anyway, as they are similar to the methods they’ll use to delegate tasks.

How about companies creating a bespoke talent management qualification that team leaders must achieve? At least then businesses know that the people in charge of their talent are talented themselves.

Everyone needs friends during hard times. In business, social networking could be a safety net during recession, helping to build outside partnerships and encourage greater innovation and communication within the business, says think-tank Demos.

It’s done some research for telecoms provider Orange that indicates businesses are beginning to see the value of social networking within the business, using tools such as Facebook, Huddle, Twitter, as well as blogs and wikis to get people collaborating across the business and with customers and partners.

Social networking tools can provide a safety net for business during difficult times, says Peter Bradwell, Demos researcher and the co-author of the report, “Network Citizens”.

“In today’s difficult business environment the instinctive reaction can be to batten down the hatches and return to traditional ‘command and control’ techniques,” he says. But allowing employees flexibility and freedom “appears to create businesses more capable of maintaining stability,” he says.

According to their CEO John Chambers, Cisco saved $150 million through collaborative tools that harnessed networks of ideas: “For the first time, collaborative IT will be so
intertwined with the business strategy you won’t know the difference between the two.”

It also encourages employees to forge relationships across the company, and to build links with customers and partners.

Key areas where social networking can help are in encouraging people to innovate, raising productivity and helping with what Demos calls ‘democratic working’.

But the nature of social networking means there are certain unwritten rules that users should abide by — largely to do with respecting users’ freedom and trusting them not to abuse that freedom.

Some do’s and don’ts for making social networking successful at work:

1. Don’t separate ‘professional’ and ’social’ networking — don’t try to control your team’s use of social networking tools.
2. Do recognise the value of building outside relationships via Web 2.0. Too often, it’s only the most senior people in a business who are allowed to build outside relationships, but the more democratic workplace recognises the value of “horizontal networks” at all levels of the organisation.
3. Keep in contact with former employees through networking.
4. Do encourage employees to use social networking to build relationships with people across the business.
5. Don’t police networks, but do look at how you can improve them and collectively create your own in-house rules for operating within networks. Otherwise, there’s a risk you create exlusive and “self sealing” clubs which act against openness.
6. Don’t allow networking tools to replace face-to-face meetings. Mix and match tools to fit your business needs.
7. Do canvass your employees to find out which tools will work best for your business and try out a few methods before committing — don’t just latch onto the social networking tools competitors are using.
8. Do start at the top — encourage interaction between the business’s senior executives and the rest of the business. Show your commitment to creating an open, democratic organisation by getting everyone to learn how to use social networking tools.

(Photos: Luc Legay, CC2.0)

Even hitherto impervious tech companies are a bit more circumspect in their forecasting. But there are still opportunities to do more than survive the downturn, as Silicon explains.

There are certain sectors of technology that could benefit from corporate belt tightening, says consultancy Frost & Sullivan’s report, “ICT Opportunities in an Economic Downturn”. The downturn could also result in a number of mergers and acquisitions as the industry consolidates.

“In particular, ICT solutions that shift costs from a capital to variable component, focus on productivity increases and cost reduction, and support organisational restructuring and acquisitions are likely to see growing demand,” says Andrew Milroy, ICT director at Frost & Sullivan.

Here are some sectors that could do well from a downturn:

1. Sustainable investments — virtualisation, thin clients, power consumption modelling, videoconferencing. These may attract more business as companies look to both cut costs and improve their environmental performance.
2. Outsourcing, managed and hosted services. Software as a Service (SSaS) lowers in-house costs and can be used for a range of services.
3. Self-service systems such as mobile phone transactions, legal or HR-related paperwork, ebilling, online banking.
4. Some managed services, including network services, leasing, and managed handsets.
5. Outsourcing — despite offshore outsourcing providers’ reliance the financial sector, they are likely to benefit as companies seek to lower costs. A report by consultancy McKinsey predicts a rise in remote infrastructure management (managing servers and IT hardware from afar), which looks set to earn offshoring providers some $7bn this year. But contractual terms are likely to become more flexible.
6. Improved data management — business intelligence organisations look set to benefit from the greater need for compliance and transparency of reporting, while CRM specialists could thrive as companies seek to add value.

Fear of failure can prevent people from doing various things, but fear of success also gets in the way. We develop our self-concept from an early age and once it is formed, it is difficult to change. We “know” what we can — and cannot — do.

Sometimes when things are going really well and success is following success there is this little voice that starts saying: “This is too good. I’m not that talented. I can’t sustain this.”

If you listen to the voice, you will never be that good and you won’t succeed. People who play competitive games know all about this. To overcome failure you have to have a level of self-belief and tenacity.

The trick is to overcome failures when they happen — and they will. First, you must recognize that failure’s an essential part of success and that it’s an opportunity to learn and improve.

Second, look carefully at every so-called failure to see what didn’t work and what needs to be done differently. Why is it that the sporting world understands the indispensable nature of performance feedback but public service organisations and companies don’t?

Why does Tiger Woods spend hours practising? So he can play any golf shot imaginable. And why does he have a coach with him while he’s practising? To adapt Bill Clinton’s famous phrase: “It’s the feedback, stupid.”

Third, you need to persevere. The fur trappers of the far north used to say: “The next mile is the only one a person really needs to make”. But if a fur trapper’s motto doesn’t suit you, here’s another source of inspiration: “Perseverance is failing 19 times and succeeding the 20th”.

How can you argue with Mary Poppins?

(Photo: Stewart Rassier, CC2.0)

Most organisations die, not with a bang, but with a whimper. The headlines may be grabbed by the major company disasters, such as Lehman Brothers’ collapse or Enron’s self-destruction.

But corporate cemeteries are more commonly filled with businesses that breathed their last after a long, gradual decline or which were so frail they failed to overcome the organisational equivalent of a common cold.

What’s even more depressing for these companies is that they aren’t missed, or maybe even remembered, by their old customers. Their graves are unkempt, overgrown and abandoned.

The emerging recession will undoubtedly accelerate the demise of many more organisations, large and small. And the companies most at risk are those where their customers don’t really care about them.

Woolworths is currently at the centre of speculation about its ability to survive. The speculation may or may not be true, but what is clear is that their customers seem to have stopped caring.

In a recent Retail Week survey over 40 per cent of shoppers said they wouldn’t miss Woolworths at all if it ceased to exist. For a mass high-street retailer, this is a hugely worrying statistic and suggests that Woolies is in danger of following the likes of C&A or Fine Fare or Safeway — once high-street stalwarts that no longer exist.

There are three cornerstones to building stronger support from your current and potential customers:

1. A distinctive proposition. Customers face too many choices to notice incremental improvements or me-too offers. Distinctive businesses create more interest, excitement and profits. In their book, “Blue Ocean Strategy”, W. Chan Kim and Renee Mauborgne found that out of 100 business launches they studied, only 14 per cent were truly distinctive, but these companies accounted for over 60 per cent of the total profits generated.
2. An engaging experience. Starbucks’s success, for example, was based on its ability to transform the purchase of coffee into a lifestyle experience.
3. A long-term relationship. Tesco’s slogan of “Every little helps” has led it to create a series of small wins for its customers. Quicker queues, new products and services, lower prices and loyalty card benefits have all helped improve the lives of Tesco’s customers and create closer ties between the company and its shoppers.

What do you think? How else can companies become indispensible to customers? Share your ideas below.
(Photo by WWarby, CC2.0)

Lufthansa looks set to exercise its right to buy Bmi (which used to be British Midland International). Majority shareholder Sir Michael Bishop is expected to sell his 50 per cent stake plus one share to the Frankfurt-based carrier for an estimated £318m.

Bmi is relatively small, but it holds 12 per cent of the sought after landing slots at Heathrow, Europe’s busiest airport. It also operates a mid-haul carrier, BMED, to Africa and the Middle East.

But the big lure for Lufthansa is the Heathrow slots. Another of Bmi’s shareholders, Scandinavian Airlines (SAS), owns Heathrow slots worth an estimated £770m and is rumoured to be interested in offloading its 20 per cent stake in the UK airline.

Lufthansa and Bmi already co-operate on landing slots as members of the Star Alliance of airlines. But owning Bmi would make it the second most powerful carrier at Heathrow, after BA. This makes the deal of particular interest to BA’s arch rival, Virgin Atlantic.

Virgin Atlantic’s chief executive Steve Ridgway’s keen to combine its international network with Bmi’s Europe-wide routes to create “a more effective competitor to BA”.

It has offered to combine its operations with Bmi, although it’s unclear precisely how the deal would take shape. The benefits for Lufthansa of an alliance with Virgin are tied to the Virgin’s brand power and international clout. But does Lufthansa need this if it has the Heathrow slots?

The German airline already has a strong European network that it looks set to bolster through acquisitions — it was in the frame to take over Italian airline Alitalia, and bought Swiss International Airlines and, more recently, a 45 per cent stake in Brussels Airlines.

Even with disappointing third quarter results — a 75 per cent drop in net profit to 149m euros, with operating profit down nearly 54 per cent to 279m euros — Lufthansa’s chairman, Wolfgang Mayrhuber, has said he views the current economic environment as “a constructive situation” that offers the airline “opportunities for consolidation”. Where it stops, only the Competition Commission can say.

Are current financial pressures going to bring out the bullies in your business? Quite possibly, according to UK experts on bullying at work.

The environment’s ripe: As financial pressures push businesses to cut costs but keep up productivity, there’s every possibility that stressed managers will start to exhibit the traits of a bully. Employees may be even more fearful than usual of complaining to their boss, especially if jobs are being cut: Will whining about a bully put them in the firing line? Meanwhile managers asked to deliver more with less could become highly stressed, morphing into angry aggressors who make unreasonable demands on their teams.

It could happen to anyone, too. There’s no such thing as a ‘typical’ bully — we can all exhibit intimidating behaviour under certain circumstances. According to Lancaster University Management School’s Professor Cary Cooper, who led a major UK-wide survey into organisational bullying, 75 per cent of bullying is from manager to subordinate, and bullies are most likely to be over-stressed rather than inherently nasty individuals. In other words, pressure to deliver targets could bring out the bully in even the most benign boss — with untrained managers promoted up the ranks particularly susceptible.

Some people don’t even recognise that they are bullying people, according to workplace bullying charity Andrea Adams Trust. That’s because, beyond the broad definition — the persistent demeaning of an individual — bullying can take myriad forms. Cooper’s research identified 39 managerial behaviours associated with bullying, from active temper tantrums to more subtle sins of omission: freezing someone out, withholding information, leaving training requests unanswered.

There’s no question it’s on the rise in the UK, though. At any one time, 10 per cent of the UK workforce is being bullied, says Cooper. Four year ago, 12 per cent of safety representatives considered bullying a workplace hazard. Now that figure’s 20 per cent, according to the latest Trades Union Congress safety representatives’ survey. The primary hazards of the survey are stress and overwork — which are both common in victims of bullying.

Cooper’s research found that even non-victims who work in a department with a bullying boss are adversely affected, with absentee levels high and productivity low. “It’s a case of passive or secondary bullying,” says Cooper. “They are fearful they’ll be next.”

The Legal Side
Gillian Dowling, employment technical consultant at business information specialists Croner, is a lone optimist: She sees the current financial troubles bringing out people’s Dunkirk spirit. They will be looking to put their best foot forward, she says, and will be even more aware of how improper conduct could damage their career prospects.

Legally, it’s a reasonable concern. Bullying is outlawed in the UK workplace under the Employment Rights Act — in some ways, doubly so. It could be a conduct issue (which merits at least a disciplinary action and, in cases of gross misconduct, the sack.) Or it could be deemed discrimination — violating someone’s dignity or intimidating them because of their age, sex, race, sexual orientation, religion or a disability. It’s usually systematic and persistent, but it’s not unknown for one particularly vile comment to constitute this type of harassment.

BNET’s feature package “Is the Office Bully Back?” looks at the phenomenon among U.S. businesses and offers managers advice on how to handle a problem employee. HR managers, if you want to promote awareness of the issue, November 7 is Ban Bullying at Work Day.

UCLA neuroscientist Gary Small has found that Web searching and text messaging is changing the way our brains work — and helping us to filter information and make quick decisions.

In a study of 24 adults, he found that experienced Web surfers’ brains showed double the activity in areas controlling decision-making and complex reasoning as the those of fledgling Net users.

It’s nothing short of an evolutionary change, according to Small, whose book, “iBrain: Surviving the Technological Alteration of the Modern Mind”, is all about how technology’s affecting the way people’s minds develop.

“We are changing the environment. The average young person now spends nine hours a day exposing their brain to technology. Evolution is an advancement from moment to moment and what we are seeing is technology affecting our evolution.”

But while technology gives with one hand, it takes with the other. Users can become addicted to surfing and spend so much time scanning the Web for the latest information that they become overstressed. What’s more, too great a focus on virtual friendships and too little on real ones can result in poor social skills, with online ‘friendship addiction’ causing insecurity among users.

Too much time online may leave so-called “digital natives” unable to read human behaviour — a major problem for anyone in a position of leadership, especially in an age when individual personal development is a management priority.

The people who will have the edge in this not-so-distant future will have technological ability and the social skills in equal measure. Either that or their entire business will be run online.

 (Image: Reigh LeBlanc, CC2.0)

As the financial crisis finger-pointing continues, eyes are turning to the business schools. What part did they play in the meltdown? And is now the time to re-think their own assumptions? As Simon Caulkin observes, it’s not just the economics-dominated MBA that’s now seen as unsustainable.

Business schools have become sausage machines — they all preach the same orthodoxies. Years later, greed and groupthink has come back to haunt us.

This is the first global crisis to have been created at leading business schools. Several of the meltdown’s major players, from Merrill Lynch’s Stan O’Neill to Hank Paulson to Andy Hornby of HBOS, are Harvard graduates. Dick Fuld, who ran Lehman Brothers, went to Columbia Business School (perhaps that’s why his bank wasn’t bailed out).

The bankers were advised by the brightest brains at McKinsey and other consulting companies, which are more or less outplacement firms for newly minted MBAs. The brilliant insight of these great brains led all the banks to the same failed strategies which is costing the world a few trillion dollars.

Contrast this with some of the richest entrepreneurs in the world — Mittal, Branson, Abramovich, Gates and Buffet are all MBA-free.

If you’re aiming to be an entrepreneur, an MBA cannot teach you any of the important lessons of success: leadership, the art of the hustle, personal bravery, resilience and risk taking. They cannot teach creativity, daring, inspiration and real insight. They can teach none of the things that matter to a successful entrepreneur.

Doubtless business schools are now writing case studies about the crisis in order to show how regulation failed, individual banks made poor choices and how economic conditions failed everyone. They’d do better to write a case study on how avoid creating a generation of corporate clones who are imprisoned by greed and orthodox thinking.