Banter Without Borders

Leadership, Envirosustainability, ROI and the future

 

For the past year I have worked for a retail company that is Leeds certified in many of its locations.  If you don't know what that is, check your wiki leads, library and the EPA.  Retail is very humbling and eye opening at the same time.  You really get an insight into new/other ways of thinking and through some self examination, a new perspective on human nature, ethics, theft, technology, and the need to preserve the environment and be sustainable.  So, what does this all mean?  It becomes evident we may be technologically astute and I know I have worked with younger colleagues who have a thorough and comfortable grasp on the latest technology to avoid human contact and dialog.  I have witnessed the best "drive by" communications one could imagine and some of the worst cases of honesty and integrity.  Seriously, why would you steal hand cream, a wiffle ball, or socks?  And, I can't believe people will wear old athletic shoes, try on new ones, put the old ones in the box and walk out with the new ones.  I guess I was brought up differently.  I believe my standards are higher and I am slowly losing my faith in humanity.  You might wonder how this ties into the bigger picture of the ecosystem and the interactions of products and resources.  There is a connection in the way we all look at the environment we live.  Are we all thinking short term and feel that our individual actions have minimal impact.  Are we like the Occupy Wall Streeters who really haven't articulated what they want while they protest in their high priced North Face coast and Columbiajackets while they camp out sleeping in their high tech -45 degree Marmot sleeping bags?  There seems to be a disconnection in their direction and their cause.  Let’s transcend into the bigger game.  In order for you, for your company, to sustain growth may mean you need to operate smaller, with minimal wastes, with a smaller carbon footprint and a restoration which includes giving more than using.  Many companies are now paying more for forest restoration for lumber they use.  But, shouldn't they be paying less.  Shouldn’t those companies who are replenishing their resources receive incentives?  Shouldn't farmers who raise unaltered grains and beef receive a tax break?  Farmers all know you can only fertilize the land a limited number of times before the soil is worthless and will not support vegetation.  They also know you are able to alter animal growth for limited times before the animal becomes sterile, or worse, has offspring which are mutants and genetically deficient.  There are many people aware of this but apparently it isn't at the forefront of their thinking.  There is way too much focus on the Kardasians, or any other of the myriad of "reality" programs.  I think the reality of our very existence and the existence of profitable, ethical, visionary companies who are concerned about sustainability is critical.  Organizations which do not take the leadership role in protecting and preserving the environment to ensure they can sustain their capital growth will find themselves on a metaphorical burning platform.  They will find themselves in a position where the choice will be to burn to death or to jump off and change everything they do or they will perish.  The choice seems clear.  You and your organization can try through little steps, such as localized recycling.  Overall, this is a nice start but on a small basis it’s like trying to bail out the Titanic with a teaspoon.  Organizations need to take exponential leaps and invert their thinking.  It’s not too late to ensure you have a supporting climate for growth, for prosperity, for the future of your organization and more importantly for your prodigy.    Or, you can steal the hand cream, the balls, and the shoes and eventually run around barefoot with no toys, looking for a safe place to live.  Click on this link to learn more about sustainabilty -> What is sustainability? 

Leaders and Leadership - Innate or Learned?

The debate about leadership and whether or not it can be taught or being born with it will go on forever.  Of course, this depends on the strength of your conviction of your opinion or the source of facts. 

It is said leaders are born, and to a point, this may be true.  We have all observed leaders who seem to display special characteristics of leadership.  They have a large group of followers who, at times, idolize them.  They are charismatic, energizing, appear to be knowledgeable, can be attractive, and seem to generate a feeling of well being.  Certainly these are behaviors some will admire and it may even create positive behaviors with positive results.  Admittedly, this is not all bad.  But who will you follow, who will you trust, who will demonstrate behaviors and values to conquer difficult and even insurmountable challenges?  This is where you need to identify whether or not the leader is competent or not.  This is where you are able to determine whether or not that leader has the knowledge and skills necessary to be successful.  This is the point where you begin to understand where leadership skills can be learned as well as how to be a competent leader.

Leadership competencies are the key.  We can measure the skills a leader by administering tests, quizes, or by certified board evaluations.  We can determine how much knowledge a leader posesses.  Things we can't see, but are usually which make the most difference are the invisible traits a leader holds within themsleves, their core.  We can't tell by looking at them what they think their social roles are.  Nor do we know, by observation, their core values, their own self image, or what motivates them.  These clearly are not visible, but we do draw conclusions by observing their behaviors.  So, what differentiates strong leaders from others?  Competencies are any characteristic or behavior of a leader that differentiates the outstanding from the more typical.  Therefore, outstanding leaders demonstrate competencies more often, in more situations, with better results.  

Taking all of this into consideration, leadership skills can be taught and you may have born leaders who are not competent in their leadership roles.  Unfortunately, we have observed this too many times in recent history.  But, when competent, leaders have obtained goals far beyond what anyone could have imagined.  This too, has been demonstrated in past history.  

Does your organization have a set of competencies to measure leadership qualities?  Does your organization conduct workshops for feedback to your leaders on the perceptions of their followers?  Does your organization use all methods of adult learning to ensure everyone has the ability to learn in their preferred styles?  If not, think about how you feel about your organization's leadership training and perhaps the quality of your personal leadership.

 

Global Understanding and Partnerships

The Answer is Blowin' in the Wind

 

Observing current events is required to be successful in collaborating internationally and for creating long lasting relationships.  Recently Bob Dylan was criticized for his decision to follow the directions of the Chinese government who had vetted his concert.  For those of us that grew up with Dylan’s music and had followed his life, we may have felt our hearts skip a beat upon hearing this.  Was this the same Bob Dylan who led protests and sang his own kind of music?  Was this the same Bob Dylan that danced to a different drummer?  I think this is a smarter Bob Dylan and more universal Bob Dylan and one that has a deep knowledge and respect for cultures and for a deeper understanding of his place in the universe. 

Contrast Bob Dylan’s actions with those of Kent and Vyxsin who are participants in CBS’s Amazing Race which runs on Sunday nights.  You may wonder how this fits into your understanding of being successful globally or even locally, but it truly does.  Participants in this episode were in India and competing by completing challenges in order not to finish last ending up being eliminated from the next lap of this global race.  Kent and Vyxin were running close to last and needed to catch a taxi to the airport.  They verbally yelled at two people in a taxi to “Get out” because they were in a race and obviously needed to use the taxi more than the current occupants.  I had visions of ugly Americans and two people who did not respect the people of India where they were guests.  I felt embarrassed by their actions and saw this as a perfect example of cultural ignorance and American superiority complex.

Consider President Barack Obama’s current relationship with the King of Saudi Arabia who, according to the Miami News Herald, has now asked the Pakistanis to step in should the Saudi King need help in case of an uprising.  You need to ask why, why would he take that action?  Why would he not trust the United States?  Why would one of the world’s largest oil producers no feel uneasy with the President of the United States?  From the King’s point of view, he sees our President as a threat and no longer an ally.  The Saudi King had asked President Obama to not embarrass President Hosni Mubarak and move so quickly to have him removed from power.  It’s fairly obvious this did not happen, Egypt revolted and Mubarak is confined.  The Saudi King has stated in a recent nightly news broadcast, that he no longer thinks of the United States as he did in the past but he thinks of things which will be good for the Saudis, even if it means making new allies, new relationships.

Revert back to our friend Bob Dylan.  Bob Dylan appears to understand the Chinese culture, appears to understand that his desire to have a concert in China will only happen if he respects that government and their guidelines to perform.  He wasn’t the ugly American, rude, arrogant, pushy, as Kent and Vixen were in India, and he didn’t turn his back on his friends who offered advice. 

To be successful globally you need to understand the culture you’re dealing with.  You need to understand the nuances of the local market place.  You need to respect the moral standards and values of your colleagues and your partners.  You may not necessarily agree with them, but to build those relationships you must understand yourself first, understand your biases, and after dealing with those you can only hope to be knowledgeable enough to grow.  As Bob Dylan sang, “The answer my friends is blowin’ in the wind, the answer is blowin’ in the wind.”

Exceptional Leadership takes IBM into the future

Leadership changes are frequently needed dependent on changes in technology, business climate, the environment of world events.  We are all experiencing all of these issues on a continual basis and to a great degree at extremes if we are personally involved.  The latest series of world catastrophes accentuates our emotional reactions, sometimes masking the realistic view of events, natural world events, occurring naturally.  There are events with huge impacts which we have no control over.  Hard to believe, but we cannot control everything.  Nature’s forces can be unrelenting and nature’s forces have no emotion, no feeling, no compassion, no judgment, just impact. 

So, why bring this up in an article about leadership?  Quite frankly, leaders focus on issues and events which they can do something about.  They channel their energies and resources to resolve complex issues, prevent those which they are able in the future, learn quickly from the experiences and put a strategy in place to avoid the problem in the future and grow from what they have learned.  IBM will be celebrating its 100^th anniversary this year.  Sam Palmisano will also turn 60, which is the age where IBM’s CEO’s have stepped down and passed on the gavel.  I have had the opportunity to work in IBM during the tenure of Frank Cary, John Opel, John Akers, Louis Gerstner, and Sam Palmisano.  Each of these CEO’s had unique styles which were needed during their era.  IBM has been successful because of this and “took a revitalized IBM and made it the envy of the tech world and the darling of investors.” (FORTUNE, March 21, 2011 pg 115).  Sam has taken “long term” to a new level.  IBM is his life and he connects with clients throughout the world to grow the business, increase his span of relationships, and ensure the next CEO inherits a much improved company.  Who will be next?  Will it be Virginia Rometty or Michael Daniels.  Or, perhaps Rod Adkins.  All of these potential candidates are extremely bright, thoughtful leaders with an eye on the future and with IBM blue blood coursing through their veins.  They are experienced individuals who will have an application of their needed style and leadership as they take the reins of IBM and lead it into the future. 

As Tom Watson Sr. said, “All the problems of the world could be settled if people were only willing to think. The trouble is that people very often resort to all sorts of devices in order not to think, because thinking is such hard work.” 

Has your organization taken the time to think about its future?  Has it created a talent pool of future leaders?  Do you have a program to nurture future leaders after identifying the required competencies and behaviors to meld all global cultures to thrive and excel?  If you haven’t, you better escalate your efforts and get the people who can help you. 

Interested in IBM history and their future?  Click on this link:  100 years of IBM in 13 minutes

Leading High Performance Global Teams

          

 To be successful in the current marketplace you need to be able to lead global teams effectively while not inhibiting their motivation and innovation.  The question is, how do you recognize the level of your team and how do you capitalize on their differences. 

            Global teams are formed with a vision of where the organization would like to be in the future.  A strategy is created to obtain those ends and finally a mission statement presents itself at a high level creating a sense of urgency to reach these goals.  These teams were probably formed with a great deal of thought and due diligence so as to achieve results very quickly.  The dynamics of team growth and development are very different today.  Teams are global in nature and cultural dynamics need to be taken into consideration for teams to grow into high performance teams. 

            Initially these global teams don’t work well.  There is a learning curve in understanding different cultural norms, traditions and customs.  It’s a collaboration of ideals and exchange of thoughts and feelings which help teams move from a stage of formation into one of normalizing.  But, this doesn’t happen unless there is open discussion, exchange of dialogue and communications which allow a bit a brain storming, and airing of differences.  Mutual respect is required and open thoughts for all members to voice their concerns, discuss their differences and finally appreciate the skills and unique knowledge they bring to the team.  The really interesting part about this phase is understanding some cultures have difficulty allowing for expression of feelings and also for being candid.  It’s a very fine line a leader walks in pulling global teams together but ones who understand cultural norms are more successful.  It is understanding those differences and being able to leverage them which make the global leaders successful.  But, the key differentiator in exceptional team leaders and high performance teams is the insight leaders have in understanding when they need to get out of the way and let the team thrive on their own synergy. 

            At this point, global team leaders become global team coaches.  Their roles change and the team becomes truly high performance.  The high performing global team becomes self sustaining exhibiting behaviors which are recognized by the entire organization.

 

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RO_UECfjzbs 

Leadership on the field and in the Boardroom

Having been a New York Jets fan since the days of Joe Namath, I couldn't help but observe, compare and contrast the leadership of "Joe Willie" and Mark Sanchez.  Joe Namath was a colorful charismatic leader who vaulted the Jets into the limelight and brought credibility to the AFL.  His style was brash and, as mentioned by many sports writers, he became the playboy of football, quickly earning him the moniker of Broadway Joe.  What he did was guarantee a Super Bowl victory, and he delivered it in Super Bowl III in which he masterfully lead the Jets  http://www.profootballhof.com/hof/member.aspx?player_id=161. Mark Sanchez is now the current leader of the New York Jets. 

The Jets of today is a team which requires a different type of leadership.  With today's technology and communications wizardry, everyone from the team reads, hears and observes what their leaders say and how they deliver.  Lets look at the observable characteristics of Mark.  While executing his strategy, cameras are whirling above his head, up and down the field, recording every moment, every nuance, every facial expression.  Immediately these are observed by fans, and not surprisingly, the team.  Their gazes shift to the jumbo screens where they get immediate feedback on performance and results.  The other feedback they receive is their own perception on the confidence of their leader.  The visuals are interpreted by the players/followers on how well the team leader, the quarterback, thinks they are doing. 

Right or wrong, the actions of Sanchez send a strong message.  His behavior influences the team more than he might have realized.  I had read somewhere that Sanchez even had a behavior coach give him feedback about his actions on the field.  One could easily see how well the team was doing by simply watching Mark.  Was he sitting on the bench?  Was he slumped over looking at the last plays?  Was he taking his time getting back on the field of play?  Was he smiling?  Was he animated?  Was he sending a visual message of confidence that they could win?  The perceptions of the team was their reality of how they thought he felt and how well they were performing.  Clearly, if they perceived their leader had no confidence, it reflected in the results of the team. 

How does this apply to leadership in the Boardroom?  The message is clear.  As leaders, actions can speak louder than words.  Over 50 years ago, John F. Kennedy's actions spoke volumes.  Even when he took the podium he broke tradition and didn't wear his top hat.  A small gesture, but clearly America was destined for change.  He committed we would land on the moon when no technolgy was even available at that time to complete the mission.  We all know the results of that commitment.  He displayed charisma and in the words of James E. Dyer of the Danbury News Times, "It was a 'Time for Greatness'.  Also stated by Burton W. Peretti, "His example reminds us that positive developments in America remain available for enterprising leaders to promote as we approach future 'new frontiers'". 

And, we are approaching them very quickly.  Reference Bill Gates.  I had read that Bill Gates, in his early years, would answer customer demands with, "We can do that", even if he did not have the program readily available.  The net result was, he did and we all know the results of his commitment and confidence.  But also think about the essences of his leadership and the people who followed him.  Steve Jobs and Apple...immediately your mind conjures up images of Steve and the vision he has for his company, of greatness for his employees. 

So you see, leadership is not a cut and dry operation.  Its not about applying the right style for the situation.  Great leadership is about outwardly displaying in actions, in behaviors, in values, in vision, where and how you will lead and having your followers want to follow.  Its about instilling the will and drive of others to help reach the pinnacle of success.  Its simply, living the dream, showing the commitment, creating a sense of urgency, and being there in the moment.  It takes you, the leader, to do that.  Are you up to it?  If you are, share the vision, have the courage, take giant leaps to grow and commit to be the best leader you are able.

Cultural Adaptation in Global Markets

Normandy Madden’s article, “In China, multinationals forgo adaptation for new-brand creation” (Adage, January 17,2011), focuses on past mistakes many multinationals have made and the lessons they have learned over the last decade in various global markets, and how they are developing brands and campaigns to reflect economic, cultural and language differences.

From the perspective of economic growth, China, along with other emerging markets including Brazil, India, Indonesia and Mexico are experiencing a growing middle-class with increasing disposable income and growing aspirations, all translating to opportunities for marketing branded consumables, even at the luxury end of the market. In order to capture the early entries into the middle-class in these markets, a number of multinationals are fielding entry-level brands. General Motors, for example, has introduced a starter brand in China named “Bayojun,” which retails for $7,000. Nissan similarly has an entry brand called “Venucia or Qi Chen” meaning “Morning Star.” In apparel, Levis has introduced a low priced jeans brand, “Denizen”, to aspiring Chinese teens who cannot afford the Levi’s brand; the Denizen brand will also be introduced in developing countries in Latin America and Africa.

Although understanding the purely demographic economics of marketing has not been an insurmountable challenge to many multinationals, understanding the cultural differences and language nuances tripped up many in their initial campaign initiatives. From a cultural perspective, these multinationals learned over time to cater to local tastes. In addition to its core Coke brand, for example, Coca Cola markets the “Kuat” soft-drink brand in Brazil, which capitalizes on this country’s love of guarana, a local fruit delicacy. In China, Coke markets the brand: “Spritea” a tea-flavored drink that is a combination of Sprite, the number one soft-drink brand in China, and tea, China’s number one beverage. Similarly, many other multinationals including McDonalds, Pepsi, Lay’s and others have learned over time to adapt, test and perfect local market offerings.

Madden’s article comes at a time when, as he states, “multinationals’ traditional markets are suffering the effects of tightening credit and falling consumption.” This has placed even greater importance on looking beyond the U.S. market for further growth. However, as his article implies, for those companies seeking expansion opportunities beyond their current markets, a simple adaptation of existing brands into global markets, tied to existing campaigns translated into a local language, can be fraught with risk. Even Coca Cola learned the hard way early on with its successful U.S. “Coke adds Life” campaign, which when directly translated into local market languages, resulted in communicating to the Chinese consumer “Coke brings your ancestors back from the grave.”

There are global brands, but not global consumers. The multinationals Madden cites have had the luxury of learning about a market through trial and error; many companies going global do not have those resources. Companies would benefit from doing their cultural research on values, tastes, needs and acceptable marketing strategies prior to entering a foreign market. Such research is far more cost effective than having to rebuild one’s reputation after a cultural misstep.

Advertise Locally, be Aware Globally

A recent article in Advertising Age entitled “MillerCoors thinks globally, but gets intimate locally,” contrasts the global strategies of SABMiller and A-B Inbev in marketing their global beer brands. SAB Miller believes, according to the article, that the key to winning the global beer battle is by pushing local brands and appealing to a home country’s customs, attitudes and traditions. Conversely, although A-B Inbev markets many of its local country brands with a similar strategy to SAB Miller, they will be introducing the Budweiser brand in new markets globally, hoping to duplicate the strategies of other successful global brands like Coca-Cola and MacDonald’s. However, unlike Coca-Cola and MacDonald’s, Budweiser faces marketing challenges which include a global no-growth beer market, requiring that share gains will be at the expense of other brands potentially including their own. In addition, they face at least two cultural risk challenges facing all global brands:

1.Local market creative adaptation

From a marketing perspective, the beer industry understands that advertising messages need to be adapted locally, even for a global brand. Coca-Cola and Macdonald’s learned the lesson the hard way having rolled out initially with homegrown advertising messages directly translated into the local language. It was only after a period of stagnant growth that these brands started creating locally produced advertising executions. Further, in the instance of MacDonald’s, menus changed to meet local tastes.    It should be noted that adaptation in and of itself is a limitation because a brand’s image and personality is formed in its home market, which may or may not translate well to other markets.  This can be further exacerbated as the home market marketing personnel, who are responsible for brand messaging, can continue to maintain a proprietary ownership of the message, and exert a parochial influence on local market personnel. To minimize these potential conflicts, a non-parochial overseer with global responsibility needs to be assigned.  

2. The world is flat

 What is communicated locally can be viewed globally. This presents a particular cultural risk to global brands wherein an advertising message created in one market designed for that market, may prove culturally sensitive in other markets.  This is not as much of an issue with a local brand, but when the brand is global, the message is seen as being endorsed by the brand globally. A number of global brands have experienced cultural backlash as advertising in one market, even behind a globally approved theme; have proven toxic in other markets when executed.  To guard against this, protocols for global executions need to be established and monitored.

Retailing Luxury-Online

E-tailing is no longer a luxury for the luxury industry - it's a necessity. So says an article entitled:”Ready for the next chapter in e-tailing” which appeared in the April 6, 2010 issue of the Financial Times. (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b46c36e2-404a-11df-8d23-00144feabdc0.html).  The article confirmed that the luxury Swiss watch and jeweler group, Richemont had entered into an agreement to acquire online retailer Net-a-Porter, and in so doing, became the first leading luxury conglomerate to purchase a multi-brand online store. Richemont’s action reinforces a growing trend among luxury groups to embrace internet initiatives, and follows LVMH, the French luxury group, which relaunched its eLuxury site as nowness.com, redirecting it from a product focus to one focused on culture.

These moves by retailers of luxury items seem at odds with what had been accepted as industry wisdom. Stated by Natalie Massenet, Net-a-Porter's founder, “there was a belief in fashion that you had to create an amazing experience to convince someone to buy a luxury item, and you could not do that on the web." Ms Massenet had believed early on that time-pressed, successful women would be willing to spend serious money online in order to get the products they desired when they desired them. Interesting statistics outlined by Ms Massenet concerning the Net-a-Porter site include:
•    It has 3.3 million unique users a month, and is growing by approximately 10,000 new customers per month in 170 countries around the world.
•    Its shoppers buy on average £500 worth of products, though single orders have reached £20,000.
•    "As far as we can tell there is no ceiling to what people will spend online. There must be one, but we haven't found it."

According to Bain & Co, the online luxury market is worth about $4.9bn (£3.2bn) and grew by 20 per cent last year. And, with the recent introduction of the iPad and other “tablet” devices, one can only assume this market will accelerate at an even greater pace.    

How much for the drop down oxygen mask?

US airlines have been complaining about profits and loss of revenue and are thinking about innovative ways to get more money from their customers.  The interesting thing is that they are driving their customers away with the petty way they are trying to save their business.  We have some advice for the leadership of the major airlines companies and an easy way to increase customer traffic. 

If you travel, and I am sure many of you have, you can almost recite the flight attendants messages, "...in the case of an emergency masks will automatically drop from above.  Put your mask on first and then help children or others with theirs."  The reason you do this is because if "you" are not panicking you will be able to help others later.  If you don't, you're out cold and then you add to the amount of victims.  This is fairly sound reasoning and logical.  So, why not charge for the use of the mask?  The major airlines could take the leadership role and charge everyone $5 for potential use and make billions.  Then, once they have forced them to pay for the mask...make the oxygen optional and charge for that too.  Ok, you're probably thinking, what does this have to do with overall business strategy and being profitable?  Actually quite a bit. 

First and foremost, think about what airlines have forced their customers to do.  First, you get charged for checking your baggage.  This results in people packing carry on bags to the hilt and bringing with them on board.  The result is less lost baggage, as recently reported by the major airlines, but increase in airline departure delays because of the need of more time for people to shove and push their way around while clobbering you in the head to get their bag into the overhead bin.  And, flight attendants have increased their personal claims for back injuries helping to lift those heavy carry on bags.  And what does the airline do, charge for carry on bags.  Logically, I think, they are charging for a condition they created as well as problems in getting people seated so they can depart.  This just doesn't sound fair to me.

Fixing the problem isn't as difficult as it may seem.  It takes innovative leadership, an understanding of local culture, specifically US culture, and the presence of mind to think innovatively.  Has it dawned on any of the CEOs that Americans will pay for quality service, for being treated with respect, and for comfort?

The plan:  Allow for free bag check-in up to 50 lbs, per adult, regardless of the amount of bags.  Allow for only one carry on per person and have it be a specific size, no exceptions.  Preferably this should have a maximum size of the typical overhead sized carry-on, again no exceptions.  Increase the cost of the ticket to a reasonable level that would cover the current add-on charges.  Now, add some leg room, and offer a few amenities for free such as soft drinks and water.  I can almost guarantee you will fill flights, you will gain customer loyalty, your customers will speak highly of your brand and your customer base will increase.  I think it's fairly obvious your ROI will be exceptional.  Or, you may want to consider how much airline CEOs are willing to pay for their own oxygen masks.