Just one link for you today.

It’s a new site dedicated to the premise that not all CEOs are bad guys.

So grab yourself some coffee, or a beer if it’s that time, and take a look at what some of the thousands of good CEOs are doing to have fun and/or give back.

I hope you have a great time at Not All CEOs Are Jerks.

Image: MykReeve on credit: flickr

Who’s innovating? Why is it important to stay focused on innovation? How are companies doing it in today’s economy? Check out Business Week’s story on the 50 Most Innovative Companies and don’t miss the side bar on the 25 most innovative companies you’ve probably never heard about.

A second innovation commentary comes from consultant Peter Bregman who offers up and interesting perspective on why It’s better to be David in this economy than Goliath.

What’s happening in compensation these days aside from Wall Street bankers with dubious bonuses? Here’s the information for those of you wondering what CEOs are earning or whether it’s worth going for MBA.

That’s it for this week. Have a wonderful weekend and keep your eye on the innovation ball—that’s really what pays.

Image credit: MykReeve on flickr

Today is about the boss, but the reasoning behind the ‘leadership’ advice can be used by anyone.

First is advice from Toddi Gutner in WSJ Online for what to do as an incoming CEO. The advice is well worth reading considering 1,484 CEOs turned over in 2008.

Next a look at CEOs from a different culture and with a different attitude. It’s not that the Japanese do everything right, but American CEOs could certainly use a dose of their humility.

Right up there with humility are the findings of the Center for Creative Leadership that found soft skills to be of major importance during harsh economic times.

“The greatest challenges were identified as: motivating staff in uncertain times; being able to clearly communicate the rationale for changes; working within a leadership team format rather than alone; and developing staff for redeployment rather than layoffs.”

Finally, two great interviews, one with Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz and the other with Kevin Sharer, chief executive of Amgen. Amazing what you can learn from real pros who produce real value.

Enjoy and I hope that you’ll take a moment to share what you learn from these sources.

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: flickr

The best dressed Wall Street leaders

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: flickr

Now checkout their favorite drink.

Image credit: flickr

I’m no happier about the AIG and other bonuses paid to screwed up Wall Street banks, but I’m not sure why any of us are surprised.

“In the largest 25 corporate bankruptcies between 1999 and 2002, while hundreds of billions of dollars of investor wealth and over 100,000 jobs disappeared, the Financial Times found the “barons of bankruptcy” made off with $3.3 billion.”

Giant compensation packages, guaranteed bonuses and platinum parachutes are excused by Boards and executives as necessary to attract the “best and brightest,” but here’s what’s really going on.

The ‘names’ demands outsize compensation/stock options/guaranteed bonus/etc. in order to validate their ‘brand’.

Those responsible for hiring not only meet the demands, but even exceed them in an effort to attain or sustain the company’s reputation as a better home for ‘stars’—the more stars you have the greater the bragging rights— mine’s bigger than yours in high school locker room talk.

Now let’s consider the folly of this attitude.

Those hiring often seek a name brand in the mistaken belief that the brand comes with a warranty that guarantees good results.

But no matter who you hire you’re actually paying for their past performance, which is always influenced by

• circumstances—boss and company positioning in its market and industry
• environment—culture and colleagues;

and let us not forget that minor factor

• the economy.

The hiring mindset is that everything the brand accomplished was done in a total vacuum and dependant only on the brand’s own actions, therefore changing every single surrounding factor will have no impact on performance.

Put like that it sounds pretty stupid, doesn’t it.

This is one of the prime reasons that so many CEOs bring their ‘own team’ over when they move, as do managers all the way down the food chain—they know they didn’t do it alone.

CEOs aren’t like movie and rock stars whose very names draw consumers into spending money—nobody ever bought a product from GE because Jack Welch was CEO, nor do they carry Jobs iPods—so why pay them that way?

Moreover, assuming that performance occurring during an expansion is a valid yardstick for performance in general, let alone a downturn, is sheer idiocy.

You have only to remember the difficulties faced by people whose management skills were honed between 1991 and 2000, the longest expansion in our history. When the recession hit in March of 2001 they had no experience whatsoever of how to drive revenue or manage in a down economy.

That recession and the previous one in 1990 lasted only 8 months each. The longest recession we’ve had was 2 years, January-July 1980 and July 1981-November 1982, and that one had a 12 month break in it. This means there are a very small number of managers with any actual experience managing in anything even close to what’s happening now.

The current recession officially started in December 2007, so it’s already 15 months old and the end isn’t in sight.

What experience makes these folks the ‘best and brightest’ for today’s world?

Just what the hell are companies still guaranteeing oversized compensation and exorbitant exit packages when now is definitely the time to pay for future performance—no guarantees.

Image credit: flickr

What does Yahoo’s new CEO Carol Bartz have in common with incoming President Barack Obama?
While they are superb choices as managers and as leaders,

1. both are entering their respective stages at a time of crisis;
2. both have multiple and diverse constituencies;
3. both are the focus of extremely high, often conflicting, sometimes impossible expectations; and
4. both are subject to substantial outside influences, circumstances and pressure.

Hopefully both will succeed, but the real lesson to be learned here is in the list of commonality and what they do.

Not because of the obvious difficulties, the scope of challenges or even enormous pressures, but because these four points are what every person in charge faces—from multinational CEOs through small biz owners and managers at every level to parents. In many ways the scope isn’t even all that different, relatively speaking.

It’s like cooking. You can take a recipe for two, multiply by X and feed an army.

Which makes this the opportunity of a lifetime.

Look at your world, professional and personal, and analyze it based on the four points above and sort accordingly. Then watch the actions of these two role models.

For instance, Obama spent substantial time before the election and all his time since talking with a wide variety of people and gathering a diverse amount of information from all quarters—including just plain people—in order to be as fully briefed as possible to the situations he’ll inherit on January 20th.

Bartz plans to gather diverse intelligence from all stakeholders and doesn’t seem interested in just kowtowing to those with power.

“But for the moment, she doesn’t even seem to care [about a Microsoft deal]. She told journalists to stop already with the speculation and advice, and explained that she would take her time listening to employees and customers before making any big decisions.”

Ask yourself, how often do you take on a situation by doing instead of listening, analyzing and thinking first?

Plan on watching these two, learning from what they do and applying that knowledge to your own situations—kind of long-distance mentoring.

Your comments—priceless

Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Image credit: