Pascoe's potshots
Latest
Subscribe
Or receive Pascoe's Potshots weekly by email
Recent
Search Pascoe's Potshots
Archive of Pascoe's Potshots
(note: search terms must be more than four characters.
To search for a phrase like "road to success" enclose it in quotes as shown)
LEADERSHIP: WHY WAS GOLDMAN SACHS SO STUPID?
published: 2010-04-19
There have been two volcanoes in the news recently: one spewing ash into the air over Iceland and much of Europe; the other igniting a potential fire-storm of banking regulation and litigation in the US and elsewhere. The first warns of nature’s unparalleled power; the second of man’s repetitive stupidity. The Goldman case is commercially extreme – in scale and implications. However, as leaders, we daily face moral questions: does this customer deserve her money back – regardless of the fine print? Given what I know, must I retrench my biggest-selling salesman? Are the representations I’m making about this product true? By a career of such decisions, we build our image and brand – as a company and as a leader. If I polled your staff and customers, how would they rate you on honesty and integrity? For some of us, particularly a few of the very, very smart, this is the biggest (and most dangerous) blind spot of all. Let’s explore this a bit further.
LEADERSHIP: OLD LESSONS, NEW SETTINGS
published: 2010-04-12
I wrote recently about the Roman statesman, Cicero, highlighting his focus on principles, communication, courage and succession*. I've reflected further and identified five leadership lessons from the political world in which he lived (106-43 BC). The first resonates strongly with more recent events in the Iraq. Importantly, each has implications for business leadership today. So, if I interviewed your peers and staff, how would they rate you on each of the lessons? High, medium or low? What do you need to do to improve on each one?
LEADERSHIP: THE WISDOM OF CICERO
published: 2010-04-06
In Rome of the first century BC, most leading politicians were soldiers as well as statesmen. For example, Caesar, Mark Anthony and Brutus. But, one key contemporary was not: Cicero was primarily a thinker, orator and writer. He had huge influence during the final turbulent decades prior to the fall of the Roman Republic and appointment of the first Emperor, Augustus, in 27 BC. John Adams (the second US president) said of him that the world has not produced "a greater statesman and philosopher combined". As leaders, what can we learn from Cicero? Here are four must-haves I've taken from a biography* I read recently.
LEADERSHIP: FUTURE-FIGHTING, NOT FIRE-FIGHTING
published: 2010-03-29
"Harmony has tremendous appeal. Yet a good leader still asks how the business can do better. And, a great leader fights for what he or she believes in." This edited quote from a recent HBR article* urges us all to strive for what's game-defining, not what's marginal. Where do you and your team spend time: on operational fights with few serious implications; or, strategic challenges that can transform the business? The authors offer three checks of fight-worthiness - outlined below.
LEADERSHIP: BEWARE OF YOUR STRENGTHS
published: 2010-03-22
Twenty years ago, I was shocked to hear that some of the reasons my wife had originally been attracted to me were now driving us apart. My decisiveness and energy were leaving no decision-room for her. It's often the same in business. Our natural attributes, which are powerful and value-adding, can go to extreme and undermine effectiveness. If I asked your colleagues, which two of your strengths would they say are most causing them trouble? Here's a checklist that might help.
LEADERSHIP: FROM MARS AND ALSO FROM VENUS
published: 2010-03-15
Discussing the percentage of women in senior roles is a quick way to start an argument. Some people, including some men, argue for gender equality – or a specific level of improvement. Others, including also women, argue that merit is all that counts. Less contentiously, as leaders, I believe we need both hard and soft skills – often categorised as male or female characteristics. IQ and EQ. Numeracy and literacy. Toughness and fairness. If you asked your colleagues, what would they say about your balance – and what might that mean? Here are some thought-starters.
LEADERSHIP: THE ROLE OF THE CHAIRMAN
published: 2010-03-08
Boards get a lot of flack and it's not surprising. They're the shareholders' representatives. And, in corporate crashes (think Enron or Royal Bank of Scotland), boards are often judged as having been inadequate or worse. But the issue is broader. Even boards of successful companies (and not-for-profits) are frequently seen as not adding sufficient value. So, what's the problem? From personal experience of doing governance reviews, I believe it's more about board leadership and hence operational effectiveness; less about the issues of individual or group honesty and independence, which tend to attract the headlines and legislation.
LEADERSHIP: BREAK THE HABIT
published: 2010-03-01
A recent article in The Economist ("The three habits ... of highly irritating management gurus"*) focuses on generalisations that gurus pass off as wisdom. The article makes plain that many of their "new" ideas are old; and, most of their case examples lack merit. For me, though, the absurdity is expecting you to replace your own default behaviours with theirs. Why swap one set of habits for another, when leadership should be about problem-solving: working out what to do in a specific situation that brings together a particular group of people and a particular set of business challenges. It's about something new; not what worked elsewhere or for someone in a different situation. It's certainly never about a single approach. So, are you a guru-child or your own leader?
LEADERSHIP: YOUR KEY TO ORGANISATIONAL AGILITY
published: 2010-02-22
What would you give to achieve higher revenues, more satisfied customers and employees, improved operational efficiency and a faster time to market? That's what Donald Sull of McKinsey & Company offers if you achieve organisational agility. He defines it as identifying and capturing opportunities more quickly than your rivals. He quotes the heightened volatility of recent decades - and the acceleration during the GFC. But, what does this mean for you as a leader? Here are some thoughts.
LEADERSHIP: TRUST ME, TRUST ME NOT
published: 2010-02-15
In his first year as Prime Minister of Australia, Kevin Rudd enjoyed unusually high poll ratings. He represented a change of both priorities and approach that many voters welcomed. That was 2007. But now in 2010, a survey of five capital-city talk-back hosts* gives us the following quotes. He "talks about taking tough decisions, but I don't think our audience necessarily buys that he's made any tough decisions." "They see his language as contrived, his personality as plastic and they don't think he's got a sense of humour." They "can't understand what he's on about." Assuming you're past the honeymoon phase of your current leadership role, what are people saying about you? What do they want you to do differently? Here are six actions I've read that journalists or other commentators have suggested for Kevin Rudd in recent months.
LEADERSHIP: DEMONSTRATE SUCCESS NOT HUMILITY
published: 2010-02-08
When someone commented to Winston Churchill that Clement Atlee was a modest man, he famously replied that Atlee had "much to be modest about." I suspect Churchill (in contrast to gurus like Jim Collins) would find the current fashion for bland CEOs unacceptable. Collins says the best are "humble, self-effacing, diligent and resolute souls." Diligent and resolute sound good to me and my four decades of business involvement say they're needed characteristics. But, humble and self-effacing contradict my experience. Some CEOs cultivate quietness and consultation but that's not the same as being humble or self-effacing. So, what kind of CEO are you; and, is it working? Here are some things to ponder.
LEADERSHIP: FOR GOODNESS SAKE MOVE ON
published: 2010-02-01
As John Maynard Keynes so aptly put it "The difficulty lies not so much in developing new ideas as in escaping from old ones." An example is how old technology always colonises the new. Initially, TV news was just talking-heads - radio newsreaders filmed reading the news. Until, of course, producers realised the new medium allowed them to cut away to the accident, political leader or fashion show being described. Today, many businesses struggle to reinvent themselves online and exploit its new and hugely different potential. Is the same true of your leadership? Are you stuck in old approaches - even some perhaps, which may never have worked all that well for you? Here are six things to check.
LEADERSHIP: POWER AND PURPOSE
published: 2010-01-28
US decline and China's inexorable rise are much talked of. But, in a recent article, Josef Joffe* concludes his rebuttal thus. "Gainsayers will still dramatise China's growth rates as a harbinger of a grand power shift. But as the 21st century unfolds, the US will be younger and more dynamic than its competitors." Whether right or wrong, it's an important issue. And, his arguments have resonance for the durability of leaders, as well as nations. He stresses the requirement for "requisite power and purpose." If asked, would your colleagues say you still have these?
LEADERSHIP: DITHERING IS DANGEROUS
published: 2009-11-30
Barack Obama is doing it tough. Few US presidents have faced so many parallel challenges. At home, the GFC has continuing work-out issues and healthcare remains unresolved. Offshore, there's Afghanistan, Copenhagen, Iran, China, Russia and Israel - and they're just the big ones. Sadly, there's rising concern about his capacity to decide and act with courage on a number of these. This is not just from rabid Republicans but also fair-minded commentators at home and abroad. While you and I face tiny leadership challenges by comparison, how would people say you're doing? Here are some thoughts to guide your thinking - and actions!
LEADERSHIP: WHEN GOOD-TO-GREAT IS ONLY LUCK
published: 2009-11-23
Business gurus and their books are full of magic formulae for achieving business and career success. It's alluring: we all want to succeed. And, they often clothe their advice in research across hundreds of companies or thousands of leaders. Very impressive on the surface. But, at bottom, it's all just another medieval philosopher's stone - promising to transmute stodgy lead into winner's gold. Lovely words but not for real. And, all too often, later review will indicate this "great" company has now slipped back, and that exemplary leader has fallen from grace - or, worse, is doing time. But is there something we can learn here?
LEADERSHIP: THE POWER-DRESSING PARALLEL
published: 2009-11-16
Before I meddle with your mind, let me meddle with your wardrobe. What are you wearing today? And, why? When dressing this morning, you probably had a choice in your closet: suits, casual stuff, even beach wear. And, you made a selection. Perhaps you thought: where am I going; and, how do I want to come across? Appropriate dressing isn't a default action of grabbing the first thing you see. And, effective leadership is similar. Conscious choosing; not what worked in a different situation; or, what your boss used to do. But what's right for leading your current people in their current situation. So, why's that so difficult?
LEADERSHIP: BRIDGING FROM TRAINING TO TRACTION
published: 2009-11-09
I remember my first skiing lesson. A cold sunny morning, in a shallow bowl, above the then tiny village of Obertauern in Austria. A German friend was showing me the basics: standing up, snow-ploughing, turning and so on. I felt safe and we had the place to ourselves. But, I remember even more vividly my first attempt to get down the mountain. The learning didn't seem to work. I had the theory but no plan for the reality of steeper slopes. And, for the next week, I made a fool of myself - with much time spent face down in the snow. Sadly, it's often like that with leadership: what you take from the training sessions doesn't translate quickly enough to the steep slopes of day to day leadership. So, what can you do?
LEADERSHIP: BE SPECIFIC AND PRACTICAL
published: 2009-11-02
Twenty years ago, which was also twenty years into our marriage, my wife and I nearly separated. But with professional help, we reviewed what we each wanted and how this could be achieved. We set goals and negotiated actions. What saved us was specifics, not general principles. In most areas of life, the principles are pretty obvious. However, the specifics are what's tough and personally challenging. And, that's particularly true of leadership, which is perhaps a strange sort of legalised polygamy. A relationship between a leader and his or her followers. So, like many marriages, it may need some help - and here are some thoughts.
LEADERSHIP: 7 HABITS OF HIGHLY INEFFECTIVE MANAGERS
published: 2009-10-26
I'm no techo, nor a digital native. But Langdon, V|E|C|T|O|R's technology manager, tries to educate me. And, recently forwarded an article by Nari Kannan from www.it.toolbox.com* - and, I've borrowed its title for this Potshot. It's a play on a famous book title and the seven negative habits he lists are all too common - and, not just in IT. So, why not check below and rate yourself - and see what options you have to overcome such habits!
LEADERSHIP: ARE YOU AMATEUR OR PROFESSIONAL?
published: 2009-10-19
Heading for work recently, I ran into a neighbour I don't see very often. He was leaving for his Wednesday, early-morning game of golf. I noted his smart, all-weather jacket and his bag of high-quality clubs. Clearly a serious player, I thought. But, from our brief conversation, I soon learnt that though he'd played for years, he was still a hacker. Sadly, many of us are like that with our leadership. We do it every day and we've been at it for years. But we make little improvement. We're paid (and are therefore professionals) but we lead unthinkingly, like total amateurs. So, what do serious golfers and leaders do? And, could you do the same?