Latest
published:2010-03-08 01:27:00
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.
This Potshot has 0 comments:
Recent
published:2010-03-01 01:00:00
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?
This Potshot has 0 comments:
published:2010-02-22 01:00:00
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.
This Potshot has 0 comments:
published:2010-02-15 01:00:00
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.
This Potshot has 0 comments:
