“Ownership” is the difference between having employees who care and those who are just along for the ride.

Jim Haskett, Harvard business School professor emeritus, hosts lively conversations around current research he and his colleagues have done. The comment period is roughly two weeks and the ideas/comments are as interesting as Haskett’s original post.

Are Employees Becoming Job ‘Renters’ Instead of ‘Owners’? is the most recent and is critical to any manager looking to foster an engaged workforce.

In our work, we found that an “owner”—either a loyal employee or customer who takes responsibility for improving relationships, products, and processes as well as referring new employee candidates or customers—can be worth more than a hundred “renters—”those who are only involved with the organization to complete one or more transactions.

Think about it; why would Uber drivers care about the company — to use Haskett’s terms, they rent the job.

It isn’t just the so-called on-demand jobs that hire renters. There are plenty of them in full-time positions and, surprisingly, even in companies such as Google and Facebook.

In a recent Golden Oldie we considered the truism that “you get what you give” when it comes to respect and that’s true about most things.

Another old saying is also very true — people don’t quit companies, they quit managers.

In companies with “real” jobs, it’s the managers who determine whether employees are owners or renters.

Be sure to click over, read the comments and add your own.

Image credit: chispita_666

I am a major fan of HBS professor Jim Heskett; I like his thinking and especially like the questions he poses and the responses they draw.

In 1992 Heskett questioned the impact corporate culture had on success, but in his new book, The Culture Cycle: How to Shape the Unseen Force that Transforms Performance he identifies the missing connective link and talks about it here.

But they ultimately found that what really distinguished good and bad performers was the adaptability of cultures. They concluded that organizations need both strong and adaptable cultures to survive over long periods of time.

Not to minimize Heskett’s research, but from where I sit it seems so obvious.

All living things, especially humans, find ways to adapt to their particular situation; they have to or they won’t survive.

Corporate culture is also a living entity and the desire to preserve it by rejecting change is akin to encasing an insect in amber.

Corporate culture must adapt quickly to global, economic and political happenings or it will die.

All that said, it’s great that someone such as Jim Heskett, who has real clout and academic rigor, has proven it.

Flickr image credit: zedbee

I think Harvard’s Jim Heskett poses some of the most thought provoking questions in his “What Do You Think” forum of anyone on the web and his readers generate some of the best commentary.

In the current forum he asks, Is Profit as a “Direct Goal” Overrated?

In his experience, the most profitable companies are run by people who don’t focus on profit.

Almost to a person, they treat profit as a by-product of other things to which they devote most of their attention, things such as a focused strategy that delivers results to carefully-selected customers while pursuing policies and practices that leverage results over costs, hiring people with the right attitude (one that fits with the organization’s culture), and proper training and organization (often in teams).

Heskett cites Obliquity, a new book by British economist John Kay, who argues that business problems cannot be solved by drawing a straight line between cause and long-term effect because they are so complex, a manager’s information so incomplete, the competitive environment so complicated, analytic techniques so inadequate, and the number of things over which a manager has control so limited, that it is impossible to make the connection with any assurance.

Tony Hsieh is adamant about not focusing on profit, but that didn’t stop him from building a billion dollar company.

Take a few minutes and read both Heskett’s thoughts and his readers’ commentary. (The forum is open for comments until July 28.)

Not surprisingly, many of them disagreed and felt that profit is the right focus.

I think that it may have been true in the 20^th Century, but it certainly isn’t in the 21^st.

What do you think?

Flickr image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/hikingartist/3000884022/

It’s a holiday weekend, so I thought I’d offer you a variety from which to pick and choose.

First up is a good overview of the business and political crises that are either ignored or denied by the leading players.

Polls show that our business, political and financial systems, and the people who lead them, are seen as lacking in ethics, competence and respect. … We have a crisis of ethical culture in both the public and private sectors.

Chris O’Brien offers a thoughtful look at money, motivation and Silicon Valley, although what he says applies universally.

That money motivates us to do our best is the ultimate expression of faith in the free market. Challenging this orthodoxy is heresy.

Yet research overwhelmingly indicates not only that money is not an effective incentive for creativity and innovation — it actually may make performance worse.

Next is an interesting commentary by Donna Flagg that looks below the typical views of managing Gen X and Y.

But really, I fail to see how this is different from any other good, old-fashioned generation gap where the underlying issue is simply about a need to understand differences.

Next is more insight about your brain and the subject of daydreaming; if you don’t daydream you may find it surprising.

But now that researchers have been analyzing those stray thoughts, they’ve found daydreaming to be remarkably common — and often quite useful. A wandering mind can protect you from immediate perils and keep you on course toward long-term goals.

Finally, the comments are in on Harvard’s Jim Heskett’s most recent online discussion considering whether strategy, execution or culture had the greatest impact on a company’s success. It’s definitely worth reading, both the initial article and the comments.

Respondents who ventured to place weights on the determinants of success gave the nod to culture by a wide margin.

Have a wonderful holiday weekend!

Flickr image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/pedroelcarvalho/2812091311/

What do you do when you are booted out of your business leadership position? Go into politics, of course.

Carly Fiorina, Hewlett-Packard’s ex (to the great relief of people both internal and external) CEO is the latest to throw her hat in the ring, touting her corporate problem-solving skills; problem-making is more accurate.

So what do you do when you are booted out of your political position (or your term expires)? Go on the speaking circuit.

I realize that I may offend some of my readers, but to learn that George W. Bush is being paid $100K to speak for 40 minutes ($2500 per minute!) on “How to master the art of effective leadership” makes me ill. (Hat tip to Grant Lawrence at OEN for the heads up. I found his thoughts on the subject well worth reading.)

The next item is a great interview with Drew Gilpin Faust, president of Harvard University, who, unlike her predecessor, recognizes that communication is the most critical action when leading an organization “with enormously distributed authority and many different sorts of constituencies, all of whom have a stake in that institution” and have no tolerance for any top-down management.

Authenticity is cited by many leadership gurus as absolutely necessary, but Professor Jim Heskett, my favorite Harvard voice, solicited reader responses to this question earlier this month, “Can the “masks of command” coexist with authentic leadership?” Beyond his summation be sure to scan through the comments for significant insights both pro and con.

Your comments—priceless http://www.mappingcompanysuccess.com/seize-your-leadership-day-

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

Image credit:  nono farahshila on flickr

If you’re looking for a good resource; one that will stimulate your mind as it provides useful information with enough feedback to see a wide range of thought on whatever the subject is, then Harvard’s Working Knowledge has a lot to offer—and not just from it’s own staff.

Here’s a small sample, but it’s worth checking out and signing up for the specific subjects in which you’re interested.

First is Peter Bregman, a global management consultant, who talks about using stories to change corporate culture.

Next are professors Joshua Margolis and Andrew Molinsky in an interview about the effect of “necessary evils”, such as layoffs, on those who have to perform them as opposed to those on the receiving end.

Finally, Here’s a link to my very favorite researcher, professor emeritus Jim Heskett, who asks questions and develops amazing conversations with his followers. His current question is Are You Ready to Manage in an Irrational World? The forum is open until July 29, stop by and add your thoughts. You can find his previous discussions here.

Enjoy!

Image credit: MykReeve on flickr

Today is all about opening your mouth, what happens and what should happen when you do. Although the most of the links are directed at CEOs the information and lessens apply to all levels in or out of management.

Communicating is everyone’s responsibility.

First is a post by Steve Roseler at All Things Workplace who cites four critical reasons to open your mouth and speak instead of wondering if you should. Here they are,

• Never assume that anyone knows anything.
• The larger the group, the more attention needs to be given to communicating.
• When left in the dark, people will fantasize their own reality. Do you want their fantasy to trump your reality?
• Effective leaders are obsessed with accurate, frequent communication.

Next, Mike Chitty weighs in on what’s changed in communication and why changing from “being told” to “finding out” stimulates a wide range of good stuff.

Third is a light look considering whether voice mail is going the way of the dodo bird; the shift seems to be along generational lines…

Finally, phenomenal advice from readers to a question asked by Jim Haskett, Baker Foundation Professor, Emeritus at Harvard Business School. The question was “How Frank or Deceptive Should Leaders Be?” I’m not a big believer that leadership is just the function of the guy at the top and honestly believe that although most of the responses refer to the actions of positional leaders it’s just as applicable to anyone who ever has or will take the initiative to make something happen.

Happy reading and try and remember that real communicating requires more than your thumbs—in fact, that’s why you have a mouth.

Image credit: flickr

Why Can’t We Figure Out How to Select Leaders? was the question asked by Harvard’s Jim Heskett at the beginning of February.

It’s a pertinent question right now, since for more than a decade many of the people held up as examples of great leadership have fallen on their faces and even ended up in jail. Worse still, the companies they ran were destroyed or badly damaged—short term Wall Street numbers were met at the cost of long-term innovation and sustainability.

The Forum drew 88 comments that Heskett says fall in three categories,

• enumerating the qualities that we should look for in a leader without suggesting how we identify and select for them;
• the body of knowledge based on research and practice that can guide and improve the selection process and its outcomes; and
• why theory has had less impact on results than we might expect, essentially identifying reasons for a gap between theory and results achieved in practice.

Two quotes I found very pertinent from the original article,

“At most companies, people spend 2 percent of their time recruiting and 75 percent managing their recruiting mistakes.” — Richard Fairbank, CEO, Capital One

This is so true it’s depressing. I started my company to teach better hiring skills; it was funded by a retired CEO who believed that hiring was a manager’s most crucial task and that few managers were very good at it—boom or bust there was little interest. (Going forward, the information was folded into our overall coaching program.)

“There are certain jobs where almost nothing you can learn about candidates before they start predicts how they’ll do once they’re hired.” –Malcolm Gladwell (author of The Tipping Point, Blink, and Outliers)

Also true. It’s the difference of asking customers what they want and conceiving a product that no one mentioned because it didn’t exist—think iPod. There are no questions to tell you if a candidate can see around corners.

Even hiring a person who has done it before doesn’t mean they can do it again; there are just too many variables in any given situation.

How could you have hired someone to deal with the current crisis when it was unimaginable just a few short months ago.

Perhaps it’s time for companies to stop looking for guarantees, perfection or a savior—no candidate walks on water.

I believe what is needed is to spread leadership throughout the company and avoid hiring imperial egos. What do you think?

I hope you’ll take the time to read both Heskett’s article (short) and comments (interesting and valuable) and then leave your thoughts here.

Your comments—priceless

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

Image credit: flickr

Another Saturday and another collection of useful links for you.

Just remember to disregard anything you find that suggests that the skills and attitudes discussed are only for the anointed few and not for all of you to use as appropriate.

First up is a new site from the Washington Post and Harvard Business called The Intelligent Leader. It has some great content, including a diverse group of video interview opinions and commentary on leadership.

Next is something I’ve never heard of, which means I’m more out of the loop than I often think I am or the organization really is a bit obscure. It’s called the Foundation for Enterprise Development (FED) and says that it’s dedicated to “Fostering Science, Technology and Free Enterprise.” What I found interesting is that it has excellent information and links to studies on the effects of enterprise employee ownership.

Third is McKinsey; I frequently referred to articles and studies they’ve done. The couple of minutes required for free registration pays big dividends in the quality and quantity of information that’s available. Additionally, you can customize the kind of information that you want delivered by email. Although it’s a year old, this survey the role that CEOs believe that they should play as public leaders vs. the role they do play—a lot more talk than walk.

Lastly, is another offering from Harvard Business School that many of you already know. It’s the Working Knowledge newsletter, and you can customize it for your interests. One of my favorite researchers there is Jim Heskett, who poses thought provoking topics that draw  fascinating responses from his readers. Here are two of my favorites, the first is “Is There Too Little “Know Why” In Business?” and the second is “Why Don’t Managers Think Deeply?”

So grab a cup of coffee, settle down and dig through the links and, whatever you do, don’t skip the comments to see what other people think—then take away the best of the intel for your own use.

Your comments—priceless

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

Image credit: flickr

Image credit: stringbot

A month ago I wrote about HBS’ James Heskett’s research question on deep thinking—or the lack of it—in business and life.

Now, in Heskett’s typically masterful summing up he tells this story and says that it “captures much of the sense of the responses to this month’s question about why managers don’t think deeply.”

“A since deceased, highly-regarded fellow faculty member, Anthony (Tony) Athos, occasionally sat on a bench on a nice day at the Harvard Business School, apparently staring off into space. When asked what he was doing, ever the iconoclast, he would say, “Nothing.” His colleagues, trained to admire and teach action, would walk away shaking their heads and asking each other, “Is he alright?” It is perhaps no coincidence that Tony often came up with some of the most profound insights at faculty meetings and informal gatherings.”

The summing up is valuable, but of far more value are the 136 comments from people around the world.

Take the time to read Heskett’s query and his audience’s thoughts, then ask yourself—how much deep thinking do you do?