I was delighted when I was sent a free copy of Barack, Inc.: Winning Business Lessons of the Obama Campaign to review. Not just because I voted for him, but because this is a book about how to sell change, major change, to strangers and in doing so turn them into a community of supporters.
That’s what Apple did with the iPod and that’s what every CEO recognizes as being of paramount importance.
But it’s not just about managing change; it’s about creating a desire for it. It’s about creating an environment where changes are being driven by your workers, not just by you and your execs.”
That’s what Obama and his team did brilliantly and that’s why you should read the book.
Forget politics, think about the challenges your company faces. Survival isn’t enough.
The business world and consumer landscapes are changing—industries that downplay or ignore innovation to focus on survival and the status quo out of fear of upsetting their current business model are likely to be swept away by the transformation rocking the global economy.
To thrive, you need to engage your current stakeholders (investors, employees, vendors, current customers)—just as Obama did.
His success turned on three main points, he
kept his cool under all provocations,
applied social technologies, including blogs, texting, and viral videos, and
made himself synonymous with what he was selling—change.
Obama allowed nothing to be set in stone and moved swiftly when the landscape changed.
One of my favorite examples was his choice to reject funding limitations, although he had previously said he would accept them. Why?
Because he realized that the amount of money he would raise via the Net more than compensated for McCain’s bashing him for the switch.
Now substitute ‘innovation’ for money and ‘quarterly results’ for bashing and give it some hard thought.
Read the book; adopt/tweak/adjust its lessons and tools for your company’s situation and then execute, because all the theory and examples won’t help unless you have the courage to use them.
Richard’s recent posts (here and here) questioned what happens to culture and people as assets during a tanking economy.
Is culture anything more than lip service? Glib words to throw around during an expansion, but hollow and valueless otherwise?
Yes—and no
Unfortunately, too many executives still see people as an expendable resource—interchangeable and replaceable.
But not all.
The companies with strong, innovative cultures where executive action supports an environment that challenges and encourages growth will come out of this stronger and miles ahead of their lip-synching competitors.
They also know that keeping their people motivated and as happy as possible is the only option if they want to keep their customers happy.
Think Apple, Nucor, IBM and dozens of others, large, medium and small, where the execs practice what they preach.
But no matter how authentic the culture, the economy happens and companies have to deal with it—and even the best may face layoffs.
“Employees Are Our Most Important Asset” It’s almost ubiquitous in corporate culture statements, but what does it really mean?
Financially, employees simply don’t show up on the balance sheet. On the income statement, employees are definitely an expense, often well over 50% for most service-oriented companies. So, in any accounting or financial sense, employees are simply not treated as assets.
Next, asset ownership. Companies own assets .They can buy assets, sell assets, and borrow against assets. Pretty difficult to do that with employees.
Finally, assets tend to have long lives. Real estate has a long life, patents last 17 years (or more); even inventory has a shelf life up to a year.
But companies treat employees just the opposite. Companies resist unionization, which creates long-term relationships with employees. Companies prefer “at will” agreements, which allow the company to terminate employee relationships with only two weeks notice. Is that long-term thinking?
Bluntly, most American companies simply do not treat employees as long-term assets. European companies are even worse. Due to government regulations limiting a company’s ability to terminate employees; most European companies go to extreme lengths to avoid hiring full-time employees.
Rather than working to acquire these human “assets,” they actively avoid them. Sounds like employees are treated more like liabilities than assets.
And in the US the concept of “employee as a liability” has certainly gained currency in the past ten years. Temporary employment, both full-time and part-time, has exploded. Outsourcing, both foreign and domestic, is simply one more way for companies to avoid acquiring employee liabilities.
While employees may be our “most important asset,” companies act as if employees are their greatest liability.
Does your organization claim that employees are its most important asset? How does it demonstrate that? Do your employees believe it? Let us know.
Amidst all the doomsayers and layoffs stands 34 year-old Tony Hsieh, CEO of billion dollar Zappos and as far from an imperial CEO as it’s possible to get. (I wrote about Zappos last spring with a link to an excellent interview.)
Hsieh sold LinkExchange, his first company, in 1999 to Microsoft for $265 million and then founded Zappos, a company known for its astronomically high quality customer experience and some of the happiest employees on Earth.
And the downturn isn’t changing that.
From the start, he chose to spend the marketing and advertising money on the customer experience, fostering repeat business and word of mouth advertising.
For his customers:
“Unconventional for an online retailer, Zappos offers free shipping both ways and a 365-day return policy. Customers can order 10 pairs of shoes, try them on, and send nine back. Or 10. Free.
Where other companies duck customers and hide their contact information…Zappos’ 800 telephone number is prominently displayed at the top of its Web page. At the Zappos call center, representatives work without scripts and are under no pressure to quickly dispatch with customers. … Shipping is promised in five to six days. But the company’s little secret is that most orders are automatically upgraded to free overnight shipping. The warehouse operates 24/7… The goal is building a lifelong relationship.”
For employees:
Hsieh says, “The number one focus and priority for the company, even though we want the brand to be about customer service, is company culture … Our belief is that if you get the culture right, most of the other stuff, like great customer service, will just happen naturally.”
When asked why more companies don’t do as Zappos does, Hsieh says. “Patience. Most corporations don’t want to put in the time to build customer service and a company culture. … Chase the vision, not the money. The money will follow.”
Recently, the conversation at Slacker Manager turned to how a manager bounces back from a bad hiring. Although the five steps Barry Moltz listed are good, I commented that they didn’t include making hiring a priority and core competency, which would do much to alleviate bad hires. (Barry agreed:)
In most instances, the key to a bad hire is poor synergy between the candidate and the corporate culture. Culture is also the culprit in most screwed up M&A.
There’s actually not a lot of difference between hiring one person and acquiring/merging two companies. No matter how complementary the skills, technology and experience, cultural incompatibility usually leads to disaster.
There are dozens of examples to choose from—Alcatel-Lucent is one that’s happening right now.
Good technical synergies, but light-years apart culturally.
“But the cultures could hardly have been more different. One was hierarchical and centrally controlled, the other entrepreneurial and flexible.”
Don’t assume that the first description is Alcatel, it’s not.
[Lucent] retained a command-and-control style, and after years of restructuring, executives were so obsessed with cost-cutting that even the smallest purchase had to be logged into a central accounting system… “It was a slow-moving ship with an entitlement mentality,” says John Wright, a former Lucent vice-president…”
While it may be that the candidate is the ship, it’s just as possible that she’s a speedboat. Either way synergy is unlikely and conflict almost inevitable.
While culture may not be obvious when acquiring or hiring, due diligence/interviewing is able to identify and explore it. The problem is that managers often ignore culture, because they believe they that theirs is ‘right’ and the other will change. But it’s not a case of you/your company being right and ‘her/them’ being wrong, it’s a case of the pieces don’t fit—and 98% of the time you should see it coming.
I write a lot about the importance of communications, written and verbal. Last summer I wrote about the difference just one letter can make to the meaning.
Rarely do I see typos in business headlines, so when a bulletin from Market Watch hit my email I was really surprised. Here it is.
My point? No matter how vigilant you are errors can happen. The important thing is to handle it with care and avoid the blame game. I’ll bet those responsible for proofing Market Watch bulletins were embarrassed enough without anybody saying a word.
All kinds of energy prices are rising—not just those that are petroleum or corn-based.
Think about the energy you expend each day dealing with your family culture, company culture and social culture, not to mention your personal culture, AKA your MAP (mindset, attitude, philosophy™)
Because the current storm (no, it’s not perfect) of rising gas and food prices and global competitive pressures in a shaky economy has the potential to increase your energy use exponentially.
Just as you’ve changed, your driving patterns to conserve gas you need to revisit your personal energy spending and adjust your usage. You also need to increase your energy production by saying yes more often to those things that generate energy for you.
Take the time to (re)read them. Along with better energy management you may even find more time for creative thinking.
What are you doing to conserve your personal energy?
More than 200 years ago Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe said, “Treat people as if they were what they ought to be and you help them to become what they are capable of being.”
A hundred years later Napoleon Hill said, “Think, act, walk and talk like the person you want to become and you will become that person.”
What these two great thinkers have in common is the positive use of assumption, but not assumption in a vacuum.
Assumptive management a la Goethe requires that you provide all the information necessary to attain the vision, coach as needed and be an active cheering section for accomplishments.
Personal growth a la Hill requires a clear vision of who/what you’re emulating. Yes, it’s easier with active support from those around you, but don’t let the lack of support hold you back—it’s achievable without it.
(Thanks to Phil Gerbyshak over at Slacker Manager for the Goethe quote.)
Do you use positive assumptive techniques at work or personally?
I was delighted when I was sent a free copy of Barack, Inc.: Winning Business Lessons of 
the Obama Campaign to review. Not just because I voted for him, but because this is a book about how to sell change, major change, to strangers and in doing so turn them into a community of supporters.
“Employees Are Our Most Important Asset” It’s almost ubiquitous in corporate culture statements, but what does it really mean?
All kinds of energy prices are rising—not just those that are petroleum or corn-based.
Subscribe to MAPping Company Success 