Dr Graham Wilson MBACP FRSA - 'The Confidant'

What’s in a personal value and what are mine?

Graham — Tue, 15 May 2012 09:31:07 +0000

In his address to Stanford Graduates in 2005, Steve Jobs said; “And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition”.

When we have an intuitive response to something it is often our personal values that are being touched upon. If it’s a negative feeling then we are somehow anticipating that our personal values are going to be compromised. If it’s a positive feeling, then whatever is happening is probably resonating with those values.

People who live in a community that reflects the same values as their own, feel safer, happier, and more confident. In our early history, we chose to live in communities because they offered safety. Faced with the choice of two communities, we would probably go of one that appeared to offer greater safety. We couldn’t actually tell whether it WAS safer until it was tested, so we needed something to judge it by, and the shared values of the community were an important aspect of that assessment. Thus, the possession of values, and our ability to monitor our responses to them, could be argued to convey an evolutionary advantage.

It is sometimes said, that all human beings share six core personal values:

To know more (and more)
To control their environment (usually, today, by acquiring and spending money)
To express oneself
To feel loved
To have sufficient personal power to feel safe
To have a structure that orders their lives

Personally, I do not necessarily agree that these are so well established that they should be considered genetically fixed, as some authors suggest. I encounter too many people for whom one or other of these values is clearly not demonstrated through their behaviour and the choices that they make*, and yet who are apparently successfully engaged within their own community or society, that I do not feel it is right to say that they are ‘core human values’. They may be very common, but are not necessarily universal. As success does not seem to depend on them, I am not convinced that these core values offer an evolutionary advantage, so I doubt if they are (or, at least, yet need to be) genetically linked, but are more likely inculcated by societies among their young.

*It is particularly dangerous for us to assume that, because someone doesn’t appear to value (interpreted by others as ‘respect’) the same things as us, that they are somehow less evolved, less intelligent, or a lesser contributor to our society.

Societies do tend to have common rules that satisfy the last of these six values. These rules are sufficiently universal that one of them (‘The Golden Rule’) is said to be consistent throughout the world’s religions. It is ‘to do unto others as you would have them do unto you’. Much of the conflict in the world has reflected a desire on the part of one community to impose its rules (and the values they claim underlie them) on another community. It is open to debate whether it is differences in the values themselves, or differences in their translation into rules, that fuels this conflict. Thus, most Christians would like to believe that most Muslims share common human values with them. It is the translation of those values into conflicting rules by an extremist faction that some Christians will use to justify why they are fighting those factions. Thus the conflict in Afghanistan, for example, might be a desire to replace an autocracy with a democracy, a society that perpetuates inequality with one that espouses equality, a drug economy with a petroleum one, and so on. Values – personal and societal – are behind each of these.

People who work in organisations, and in roles, whose corporate values are aligned with their personal values, are likely to be more productive, happier, more creative, and more constructive than those who do not. For years, researchers have tried to identify what the ideal set of values for an organisation are. The work by Peters and Waterman in the 80s, for example, identified four common values that they said lay beneath the short-, medium-, and long-term financial performance of organisations. (They were: to exceed customer expectations, to give staff the power to determine their own behaviour, to experiment, and to nurture this culture.)

The language varies, but the sentiment of creating a culture in which all humans are valued and encouraged to fulfil their potential, lies at the root of most efforts at organisation development (OD). This is why OD specialists invest effort in establishing the values most prevalent in an organisation and, where those are perceived as counter-productive, seek to adjust them.

When assessing recruits for positions within an organisation, efforts are usually made to determine whether they will ‘fit in’ or not. This is about the cultural ‘fit’. Determining someone else’s values is not only nearly impossible, in the context of selection for employment it also opens up all kinds of ethical and moral dilemmas. So, instead, we usually try to determine in our own minds what their attitudes are to things.

An ‘attitude’ is a mental response to people or situations that we use to determine our behaviour. It is based on our beliefs, but it is modified by learning. Thus, an individual who is told by a police officer to do something, may adopt an attitude of compliance, passivity, or defiance. If they place a high value on the importance of rules and structures, and have learnt to give power to those in authority, then they are going to adopt an attitude of compliance. If they do not place such a high value on structure and rules, and have learnt not to give away their power to others, then they are likely to adopt an attitude of passivity. If they don’t place value on structure, and have learnt to protect their own power, then they are likely to demonstrate an attitude of defiance.

Of course, they may have high respect for rules and structures, but also have learned not to give away their power to others, this might be one reason why so many lawyers are either self-employed or work in partnerships, and the judicial system tends to have ritualised many of its practices.

The same principles apply in the relationship between an employee and those in positions of authority in their organisation. For example, the extent to which you agree with the value of humans being encouraged to fulfil their own potential, will shape your attitudes when called to be a leader or a follower.

Thus personal values, and their alignment with the places in which we work, our communities, and our playgrounds have a huge impact on what we choose to do, how we choose to do it, how well we do it, and what satisfactions we get from it.

So how do we determine what our personal values are? There are probably three approaches that predominate; self-reflection, anecdotal, and prioritization.

The first stems from self-reflection, albeit often helped by a less partial observer. Over time, the individual considers their emotional response to different situations and begins to look for common threads behind them. If the things that consistently anger them, excite them, amuse them, empassion them are considered over time, then there will begin to emerge a picture of the value(s) that are being touched upon. When I am helping someone to do this, I usually look for both ends of the spectrum and places in between before assuming that we have hit upon a value. Thus they need to be upset by the negatives, inspired by the positives. We will also look for their responses to parallel situations as a way of highlighting what is, and is not, the underlying value.

For example, one client was particularly distressed by the news that a family, including three children, had died in a house fire. Nothing else about families seemed to provoke such a strong response. Then one day, she described a project that some of her colleagues were involved in where they blitzed a small school in Sussex, redecorating and re-equipping it over a week. On another occasion she commented on how proud she’d been of her godchild who had read out loud to her that weekend – unlike previous reading activities the child had spoken fluently. But it was her description of a trekking holiday that she’d been on that found the common thread – the value that she placed on an aspect of exploration was extraordinary. Seeing without judging. Observing without disturbing. The importance (almost sanctity) of the pristine world. It needn’t be nature, but it was about a space that was ‘in the flow’, in harmony.

The second approach often cited is to focus the reflection by preparing a set number of illustrative stories or pictures. The number varies – 3, 5 or many – the stories or pictures generally involve some creativity. The individual is encouraged to allow their imagination to flow unimpeded. Then, either individually, with a counsellor/coach, or in a group, they describe the meaning behind their work and identify common threads.

One variation on this theme is to prepare a personal coat of arms or pennant. Deciding on what to present and how to do so forces the same kind of analysis.

A long time ago, I had a client who was an artist. Her work was well known and had a very distinctive quality to it. At first, she tended to focus on very destructive themes, but while on holiday one year she had just dabbled in painting some rural landscapes. Her life was generally pretty full-on – a real dynamo. Even the landscapes she painted emphasised the movement and growth of the space. Her frustrations were with people that stood still; that weren’t energised. The value she landed on was around progress.

The third approach, prioritisation, involves the individual sitting with a list of possible values and deciding which are more important out of that list. By a process of elimination they identify a handful that are key to them. Usually, they will identify one or two more words that are ACTUALLY the ones they wish to use. Most such exercises end with the individual preparing a sentence that puts the words they have chosen in context. There is a worksheet that you can download with a typical list of values oriented words.

Best wishes

It ain’t what you do; it’s the way that you reflect on it

Graham — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 15:08:57 +0000

In his book, “Talent is Overrated: What Really Separates World-Class Performers from Everybody Else”, published in 2008, Geoff Colvin presented an extraordinarily well researched argument that demonstrated that the key characteristic that distinguished people who were widely recognised as world class was the manner with which they approached their subject over time:

Greatness doesn’t come from DNA but from practice and perseverance honed over decades.And not just plain old hard work, but a very specific kind of work. The key is how you practice, how you analyze the results of your progress and learn from your mistakes, that enables you to achieve greatness.

His research indicated that these ‘world class’ performers spent upwards of ten thousand hours perfecting their skills. But they didn’t just mindlessly repeat the same things over and over again. Instead they consciously practiced, learning to discriminate between performances (whether good and bad or merely shades of excellent!), analysing what went well and what didn’t, and fine-tuning every aspect.

The name given to this approach to personal and professional development is ‘reflective practice’. I’ve mentioned it in previous articles:

Although the concepts underlying it are much older, reflective practice was introduced by Donald Schön in his book, “The Reflective Practitioner”, in 1983. The idea is very simple – that by analysing our own behaviour and experiences critically, we can discover ways of being and doing things better. Of course, once these insights have been gleaned, we have to integrate them into our future activities.

While the idea is very simple, it is in the application of it that many of us fall down. We often have a rather rosy perspective on how well we have done something and therefore how much there is to learn from it. We are often not as open-minded to imperfections as we could be. We are good at putting mistakes behind us! We are also good at forgetting the ‘learnings’ from the past. This is why many experts reckon that the process either requires exceptional self-awareness or else an independent partner, such as a coach or mentor.

Reflective practice involves some kind of conscious thought which has prompted some academics to proffer ‘models’ to steer the process. Sadly, most of these are quite frankly trite. Some people talk of the difference between reflecting during an event, and compare this with reflecting afterwards. Others make a point of the importance of iteration, experiment, continuous learning, and that learning isn’t effective until someone tries something another time.

There are tools that can help – by far the commonest being the keeping of a fairly rigorous personal journal.

At the end of the day, the key dimension is around the individual’s mental attitude – they have to be open to learning, and they need to be prepared to try new ways of doing things.

Best wishes

Graham Wilson – 07785 222380
executive-post.info | the-confidant.info

PS Don’t forget, you can download my e-book, “The Senior Executive’s Emergency Job Hunt” from my website – http://www.executive-post.info

How to keep in touch with your network

Graham — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 02:13:18 +0000

One of the few skills most senior executives will admit they need to develop is their networking skill. Even though it is a fundamental aspect of most such positions, the ability to network is often seen as a bolt-on rather than a need-to- have.

I’ve written a lot about the importance of networking before, and mentioned how most senior executives need a pool of around 70-80 influential people who know, like and trust them, enough to be able to confide in them if you need to do so.

Another theme I’ve often explored is the problem that many executives seem to have, where they neglect their network in times of gainful employment and regret this when they are in search of help.

So, how do you keep this group – your inner cadre of contacts – simmering until you need them?

Let’s begin with a little back-of-envelope calculation. The British psychologist, Tony Buzan, stimulated the debate by looking at our retention of knowledge over time, this has been repeated by other researchers in other areas. Essentially, most authors reckon that for someone to feel sufficiently positive towards you, you need to have be in touch every three or four months. So, let’s say that the 80 people need to be reconnected with you every four months – that’s 20 each month, 5 every week, or one every working day. You can put the envelope away now.

In all probability, it would become a terrible chore to write to one person every day – easily do-able, but a chore nonetheless!

Be creative and consider some simple ways of managing this load… A seasonal message – sent for Christmas, or the New Year – is one of their three. BUT PLEASE MAKE IT A PERSONAL GREETING AND NOT A MASS E-CARD! That leaves two more connections to be made for each person every year.

A mixture of a coffee, lunch, or after-work drink with a few – maybe one or two each week, together with a personalised ‘news’ letter sent to most of them once a year… Perhaps a message reminding them to put the clocks forwards or backwards? And, if you are connected on LinkedIn or Facebook, you could always send them a birthday message.

If geography permits then consider inviting some of them to a summer party – you’d be surprised how far people will travel for something slightly different and, with a little creative thinking again, these need not be so expensive. Invite twenty- five to an ‘end of the summer term’ party in June and a different twenty-five to a ‘last of the summer wine’ party in mid-September. The bonding created can be fantastic!

This all calls for a bit of network organisation. A spreadsheet and some forward planning with your preferred diary management tool works wonders. Remember, we’re not talking about massive lists and expensive CRM systems, but a select list of people you REALLY know. If you’re tempted to think it’s too much hassle, bear in mind that it is this cohort of people who will be determining the success of your career well into the future.

Best wishes

Graham Wilson – 07785 222380
executive-post.info | the-confidant.info

NB: Unusually, this article was cross posted on my ‘the-confidant’ and ‘executive-post’ sites as it really applies to each equally. I hope no-one will feel cheated!

Dabbling with the minds of leaders and society

Graham — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 13:56:17 +0000

The RSA has just published a report entitled; “Beyond the Big Society – Psychological Foundations of Active Citizenship”. You can download it here: http://www.thersa.org/projects/social-brain/beyond-the-big-society. It’s a fascinating read, making a call for far smarter interventions in the psyche of society.

It focuses on the model of adult psychological growth developed by Prof Robert Kegan – a model that is used by quite a few business coaches.

This builds on a previous report on transforming behaviour change: http://www.thersa.org/projects/social-brain/transforming-behaviour-change again, applied to the nature of society and the human dimension within it. Much of the evidence it draws on has a lot to offer the world of business coaching..

There has been an explosion of coaches in recent years which, in theory, I don’t have any problem with. There’s plenty of evidence of the effectiveness of one-to-one discussion on personal learning and especially in changing attitudes and values.

However, any kind of intervention that is psychological in its nature brings ethical questions and I think we need to be aware of these before we get stuck in!

A few years ago, I was Group HR Director for a very large organisation with around 150 so-called “High Flyers”. As a part of the development process that I inherited all of them were encouraged to have a coach. I did a confidential review with all of them and established that 30 had actually got one. I then asked both the individuals and the coaches to complete a simple questionnaire – anonymously. They were each asked to identify the areas that they addressed in their sessions (eg business planning, self-confidence, motivation of others, politics – the list went on to list about 25 aspects). They were each asked to rate the effectiveness of the coach/the learning of the client in each area. Finally, the coaches were asked to outline the professional qualifications and experience that equipped them to perform their role.

The ‘effectiveness’ of the coaches was generally rated reasonably high. However, the distribution was quite spread. When I compared the lower quartile with the upper quartile and looked at the professional background of the coach, there was a marked difference. Basically competent coaches had limited extensive professional training and mid- to no- management experience. The highly competent ones were all professional psychologists or similar and all had a personal career path that was comparable with that of their client.

The range of topics addressed in their sessions paralleled this. The top ones focused on attitudinal and behavioural dimensions of the client’s work, largely internal factors, whereas the less effective ones focused on the planning, goals, and how to deal with team and individual behaviour – largely day-to-day and external factors.

This led me to question what we were doing, as a business, paying for unqualified and inexperienced coaches working on less impacting aspects of performance. But it also raised the issue of whether some of the middle (and therefore ‘normal’) ones were actually dabbling in areas that they had no real understanding of?

Of course, the sample size was far too small to draw any serious conclusions about, but it is an issue that has concerned me ever since.

I’ve written before about the concerns that I have with what some people perceive as state-of-the-art team behavioural models, most of which actually date from the Vietnam War or even earlier military conflicts.

Well here we have ‘psychology’ being applied on a societal, political playing field. Again, I am sure it is necessary, but please let’s pay some attention to the relevance and expertise of those applying it.

Cheers

Graham Wilson – 07785 222380
the-confidant.info | executive-post.info

Never mind ‘resolutions’ – what ONE thing could you do…

Graham — Fri, 30 Dec 2011 17:30:25 +0000

…to make a big difference to your work or to your senior executive job hunt?

As some of you know, I’ve written a few times in the past about New Year’s Resolutions. For example:

Keeping to your resolutions
Resolutions, goals, happiness and engagement

This year, my inbox seems to have been full of messages from coaches with suggestions for my New Years’ Resolutions. I’m sure that some of them are very sound – though, of course, as coaches they probably shouldn’t be offering advice!

However, we live in complex times, with much changing globally around us every day it seems. So, I wonder how relevant New Year’s Resolutions will be this year? Of course, some will always be, but those related to our work may be more critical – more like “urgent and important” tasks on our never ending to-do list.

One of my ‘confidant’ clients (http://www.the-confidant.info) decided to use our last session of this year as a strategic review. She went over the things she’d planned to do throughout the year and identified a handful that hadn’t happened. She then reviewed whether they were still relevant. Finally, she was left with a couple that seemed as important now as then. Rather than say she’d tackle them both, she acknowledged that they’d been around for 12 months and nothing had happened, and committed to deal with one in the quiet period between Xmas and the New Year.

This set me wondering what one thing I could do to dramatically improve my own business activities next year?

I have just been made very aware of my own shortcomings on the financial management side of my business. So, the one thing that I am very clear I need to embrace next year is proper management of my finances – not just projecting the income streams (I actually do that aspect of the business plan bit quite religiously each March) but far more precise tracking and recording of information, and thinking through the consequences of different aspects.

In the past, I’d have dismissed this as something that would never make a big difference. However, Anthony Mellor has helped me see some of the many errors of my ways this last fortnight. In a way, I’m resolving to do things better next year, but it is also one big thing that could make all the difference.

QUESTION: So, if you lead an enterprise, in whatever form, ask yourself what are your ‘blind-spots’ and see if there isn’t something you could do that would make a BIG difference.

I’ve noticed that the people who tell me that the employment scene, especially for senior executives, is ‘good’ are the ones who are in work and have been more-or-less continuously for the last four or five years. In my work with Executive-Post, I’d beg to differ. Some of my clients were on sky-rocketing career paths, were made redundant, and have been looking for over 6 months. It’s easy to get dispirited and one of the things I try to do is maintain their enthusiasm over the Christmas and New Year period.

One of my clients let me know on Christmas eve that he’d had a successful job interview and is going in for a final one, this time with the ultimate decision maker, in the first week of January. He’s been out of work for quite a while and I know it is going to make a world of difference.

What happened to bring about this sudden bit of good ‘luck’? Well, early in December, we agreed that he’d spend the month going back over the networking contacts he’d had over the last couple of years and pick up the thread with those he’d dropped. Among these were people who he’d been interviewed by but had never followed up with when he didn’t get a job offer. One of the first he tried came straight back with: “I am so glad you’ve got in touch. Yes, there is a job going – and actually, it would probably suit you perfectly. Why don’t you pop in for a chat?” Two meetings later and he is into negotiating.

So, my suggestion to anyone on their senior executive job hunt would be… go back over your diary for the last 18 months, see who you have not had any proper contact with, and ask them for a coffee. Fill up your diary for January now. Doing this one thing could make a big difference.

Do me a favour… Add a note to this article and inspire someone else – let us know what you’re planning on doing and even let us know when you have!

Cheers

Graham Wilson – 07785 222380
the-confidant.info | executive-post.info

What exactly is an entrepreneur?

Graham — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 02:04:08 +0000

BLOG: What exactly is an entrepreneur?

I’ve been doing a lot of work around the nature of entrepreneurism lately, and thought it might be a worthwhile topic to explore with a wider group of people too.

Mention the term ‘entrepreneur’ to the public and you’ll get very different definitions. Probably because of programmes like the Dragon’s Den, many people actually confuse the individual with an idea with the investor providing the money to make it happen. Most will also assume that the term was an invention of the 1990s.

It was actually first defined by the Irish-French economist Richard Cantillon, in 1755, and for many years was applied to the ‘owner or manager of a business enterprise who makes money through risk and initiative.’

There are all kinds of emotional projections onto entrepreneurs – respect, an accolade, glamorous, playboy, risk taker, slightly unconventional, an eye for success, not put down by failure, arrogant, self-interested, emotionally detached, analytical, passionate, and countless more. I want to move away from these and see what constitutes an entrepreneur and what does not.

I don’t personally feel that any one definition is going to be adequate to capture what an entrepreneur is and what constitutes one. Hence this slightly longer article. So, what are the characteristics of an entrepreneur, and their ‘idea’, that warrants the term?

They set up (or take over) an enterprise that has scope to be much more. This implies that they have seen, in their own mind, what that potential is, and have some kind of passion to want to pursue it.
They have a vision of that enterprise being ‘more than’ just themselves. There is absolutely nothing wrong with someone wanting a business that is entirely them, and doesn’t involve other people. They are sometimes referred to as “solopreneurs”. Some of these are entrepreneurs because they fit the other characteristics and see their brand as being bigger than them, even if they remain the only person servicing it. However, there are many small firms consisting of one or two people who have no desire to grow any larger. These don’t fit into my model of what makes an entrepreneur.
Their enterprise is scalable – it is capable of leverage – perhaps it could be reproducible elsewhere, perhaps it could organically expand. The key is that there is a potential for substantial growth that does not simply involve the proprietor from working longer and longer hours or doing bigger and bigger deals. They may do these things but the growth needs to come from somewhere else.
Whose vision includes the life of the enterprise beyond their own period of influence. The term ‘exit strategy’ is sometimes bandied around. What I am referring to here may mean that they have considered their exit strategy and that they see the enterprise in new hands and continuing to grow, alternatively, they may plan for a buy-out, a floatation (which may leave them in the chair, but provides the means for them to be removed if their investors wish), and so on. The key is that the vision of the enterprise is that it takes on its own momentum and will continue to do so when the founder departs.
Whose enterprise has a net positive environmental impact. For lots of people this will not be an expectation. There are plenty of enterprises which are established to make money, relatively quickly, and which then close down. Are their proprietors entrepreneurs? While this might well have been the case in the past, I don’t believe that it is acceptable today. It’s a personal moral viewpoint, but I’m happy with it. By ‘environment’, I do not mean purely ecological constraints – I am referring to the overall impact of the enterprise on its environment as a whole – local communities around it, its profession, its suppliers (and their communities), and its customers (and their communities). My argument is that if it is depleting its environment then ultimately it cannot meet the scalability and longevity criteria above.
And, finally, for me, I do not believe that all entrepreneurs and their enterprise need to be businesses nor necessarily ‘for profit’. If someone establishes a new Art Gallery, a civic hall, a charity of some sort, and they do so with the vision that I have implied above, then to me they are as entrepreneurial as someone who is building a business.

An illustration that I often use is of two hairdressers. Both established their businesses in fashionable parts of London in the 1960s. Both continue to this day. One has, obviously, refurbished their salon, and has seen a steady transformation of the ownership, but it has never grown beyond what it was when it began. Thus it meets all the criteria but it hasn’t been scalable. The second opened up a few shops every month is equally fashionable areas of the world. Their staff all trained under the founder in London, and rather than buy in hair care ‘product’ they launched their own brand. They were acquired by a major fashion house but retained their brand and the founder continued as Chair and chief inspirer for many years. By the time he was ready to retire completely, he had already been simply a figurehead for a decade or more, and there was an able leadership team already really running the show. HE was an entrepreneur, in my terms.

So, those are my thoughts. It is not as precise an area as some people would like, so what do you reckon? Have I missed some essentials? Have I excluded some very important enterprises?

Cheers

Graham Wilson – 07785 222380
the-confidant.info | executive-post.info

The art of Organisation Development (OD)

Graham — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 11:39:48 +0000

OD is the art of organisation development – the application of behavioural science to turn work into a positive and successful place in which people are fulfilled.

As a discipline, OD emerged in the 1950s as a product of an initiative in the United States known as the ‘quality of work life’ movement. The QWL movement was largely sponsored by the employee’s unions, but it gained widespread attention and was seen as a positive endorsement of, and stimulus to, progressive management practices.

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the term ‘excellence‘ was applied simultaneously by the White House and by two management commentators, Bob Waterman and Tom Peters, to the idea that long-term corporate success followed from four key characteristics – customer obsession, employee empowerment, transformed leadership and institutionalised innovation. Those four tenets were the bedrock of the QWL movement too.

In the intervening years, other initiatives have been based on the same model, though sadly few people read the whole book before they apply their own interpretation to the title! Examples would be Total Quality (TQ), Business Process Reengineering (BPR), and the Balanced Scorecard, each of which assumed the four tenets as precursors for the environment they were proposing.

OD then, reflects a discipline concerned with helping organisations develop these four tenets. It is the application of science, but with a very clear set of values about people and work underlying it. Today, most people refer to OD, rather than QWL or ‘excellence‘.

For fairly simple psychological reasons, the modern management world distrusts the qualitative and favours the quantitative.

One consequence of this is that managers in ‘scientific‘ industries (such as manufacturing, finance and engineering) often give the impression that they consider themselves a step above those in the ‘soft‘ industries (such as leisure, arts, and healthcare).

For the same reasons, a science has evolved around the behaviour of people at work – this is known as OB (organisational behaviour). OB does not have the same underlying values implicit in it and can be applied in circumstances where an OD practitioner would refuse to be involved. Classic examples would be the application of performance improvement techniques in sweatshop factories.

As the old Sy Oliver song went: “It ain’t what you do, it’s the way that you do it.”

HISTORY: This article was written and published elsewhere back in November 2004. It gets referred to from time-to-time, but I was slightly surprised to discover this week that it had been copied completely onto a Malaysian HR website! So, I thought I’d put it here as well – closer to its spiritual home!

Was Marshall Field really all that wrong?

Graham — Sat, 17 Dec 2011 01:08:20 +0000

I have learned something today. According to a debate on another social networking platform, apparently, if a customer wants something that is beyond their full understanding, then if they fail to learn enough to be able to explain to the person who is going to supply that thing what it is they want, then it is the customer’s fault if they don’t get what they want.

Let’s put that in different terms….

Let’s suupose that Fred wants a website for his business, but Fred isn’t a website developer.

Fred asks around and discovers that there’s a website developer called Wilbur. So Fred contacts Wilbur and asks him for a quote.

Wilbur is not a consultative salesman, so he listens to Fred’s ill-informed ramblings, and gives him what Wilbur thinks Fred ought to want.

Fred isn’t all that happy, but figures that this is a draft, so he tries to explain what he wants in different terms. Wilbur nods sagely, and disappears for a few days. Fred figures he’d better try writing it out, so he sends Wilbur a more detailed email explaining what he’s after. Eventually, Wilbur comes back with something else – still not really what Fred thought he’d described.

By now, Fred is pretty fed up but when he says as much to Wilbur, he is told; “I’m not telepathic you know! You don’t understand what is involved. You didn’t give me the right information, You kept changing your mind, even before the previous changes were completed!”

Now, apparently, so I have learned today, “it is the responsibility of the business owner to communicate their requirements, their goals, their current situation and future plans.” Regardless of the business owner’s trading position, it seems that “the pressure of trying to keep a small web development business running (let alone in profit) in this ever increasingly competitive industry means that there is no time or other resources to be teaching the business owner how to write a web design brief, even though it would create a better outcome for everyone.” [My emphasis.]

Now, I realise that the world has moved on a bit, and so obviously has normal business practice. Incidentally, there was a conference the other month all about trying to restore confidence and trust in the City of London. It followed a year long project sponsored by the Lord Mayor.

However, (and I’ll call myself the traditionalist before anyone else can) there was an extremely successful businessman back in the early 1900s, who coined a phrase. Well, actually, it isn’t entirely clear whether it was him that coined it, or one of his employees who went on to run his own extremely successful business. Just to clarify, by ‘successful’, I mean that they were very profitable AND they lasted a LONG time. Over a hundred years to be precise.

The American businessman was Marshall Field, and he was the man who grew the definitive business known as “Marshall Field and Co”, based in Chicago. So successful was he that he not only established that iconic store, but he also founded the University of Chicago (jointly with John D Rockefeller) and the Museum of Natural History in Chicago too, which further benefitted from a legacy of $8M when he died in 1906.

His employee, left the US to establish an equally impressive retail empire in London. In 1909,he built a magnificent property in Oxford Street, and apparently even persuaded the GPO to let him have the London telephone number “1″. He promoted the idea that shopping should be an enjoyable entertainment, rather than something one did out of necessity. Sadly, his wife died in 1918, and he suffered huge personal problems thereafter.

However, a measure of the man, is that he wrote a book which was published in 1918, entitled “The Romance of Commerce” In it, he had chapters on ancient commerce, China, Greece, Venice, Lorenzo de Medici, the Fuggers, the Hanseatic League, fairs, Guilds, early British commerce, trade and the Tudors, the East India Company, Northern England’s merchants, the growth of trade, trade and the aristocracy, Hudson’s Bay Company, Japan, and representative businesses of the 20th century.

His leadership style is captured well in some of the phrases that he often used:

The boss drives his men; the leader coaches them.
The boss depends upon authority; the leader on good will.
The boss inspires fear; the leader inspires enthusiasm.
The boss says “I”; the leader, “we.”
The boss fixes the blame for the breakdown; the leader fixes the breakdown.
The boss knows how it is done; the leader shows how.
The boss says “Go”; the leader says “Let’s go!”

His name? Well, it was Harry Gordon Selfridge.

So what was that phrase that no-one knows which of these two significant successful businessmen coined, but was their trademark – indeed their bond – in all their endeavours?

The customer is always right.

I can only guess that for the likes of Wilbur, the web developer, such a phrase is an anathema. It will interesting to see whether his name is iconic, in the UK or the US, in over a hundred years time.

Best wishes

Graham Wilson – 07785 222380
PS My free ebook, “The Senior Executive’s Emergency Job Hunt“, is available to download now.

Business Book of the Week – Understanding the Small Business Sector – Storey

Graham — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 23:54:36 +0000

I’d like to draw your attention to a blog by Julian Thompson who is the director of projects at the Royal Society for the Arts, Manufactures and Commerce (the RSA). Julian has worked as a social researcher for 10 years. Specialising in qualitative methods, he has undertaken major participatory research programmes and strategic futures work for government, voluntary sector and private sector organisations.

In a blog entitled “Entrepreneurs in the valley of death” which was published today, he begins:

“Having rather excited myself with the entrepreneurial potential of Gen Y in yesterday’s blog, I was subsequently given the research equivalent of a cold shower, courtesy of some fascinating data and insights provided by Prof David Storey of Sussex University.

In an event at the RSA hosted by Prof Jay Mitra of Essex Business School, Storey laid bare the sobering facts surrounding the survival rates of new businesses.

These are important lessons for those looking to run or invest in small businesses,and some of them go against the dominant myths of entrepreneurship. So I thought I’d share.

The rest of the blog can be read here: http://www.rsablogs.org.uk/2011/emboldened/entrepreneurs-valley-death/

David Storey, OBE, is Professor at the Department of Business Management and Economics at University of Sussex, UK. His book, “Understanding the Small Business Sector“, although it was published in 1994, is currently said to be the most highly cited work on Entrepreneurship or Small Business.

Storey’s talk will I hope soon be available as a podcast via the RSA – when I discover that it is there I shall pop a link to it here. In the meantime, perhaps you’d better get hold of a copy of his book anyway.

Incidentally, if anyone reading this and visiting the RSA website is interested in applying for Fellowship of this quite extraordinary 21st century think-tank, let me know and I will be happy to explain more.

Best wishes

Graham Wilson – 07785 222380
PS My free ebook, “The Senior Executive’s Emergency Job Hunt“, is available to download now.

the-confidant.info – Helping leaders see situations, organisations, themselves and others, differently
executive-post.info – Motivation and advice for senior executives exploring new opportunities
corporate-alumni.info – Supporting former staff now; building a network of advocates and recruits for the future
inter-faith.net – thefutureofwork.org

London (W1 & EC3) – Oxford (OX2) – skype

How crowd accelerated innovation is transforming the nature of entrepreneurship

Graham — Mon, 28 Nov 2011 18:07:56 +0000

There have been entrepreneurs forever, though the industrial revolution created the conditions for far more of them to find an expression for their skills and ideas.

Before that, entrepreneurship was given a huge stimulus when Gutenburg transformed the process of spreading ideas through the invention of printing.

Undoubtedly, the internet has done a lot to allow the spread of ideas again, but it has been limited in the past by its dependency on text. As video begins to take over as the medium of choice on the internet, so we are witnessing a massive explosion of entrepreneurial thinking.

In this presentation, Chris Anderson one of TED’s curators, explains how the nature of the innovative process is unfolding and will continue to escalate in the next few years.

He proposes a model of innovation, where three elements are needed….

The ‘crowd’ – an audience some of whom will be interactive with the innovators.

The ‘light‘ – which has to be shone on the innovation – a preparedness to share as yet not necessarily perfect ideas. Moving away from the secretive laboratories and guarded IP knowing that it is by sharing that better ideas will emerge.

The ‘desire‘ – a human drive – a passion of some kind. Some ‘desire’ may be selfish, some purely altruistic. Whatever the drive, without desire new ideas founder.

It’s a useful way of assessing entrepreneurial ventures. Have they tested their proposition with a crowd? Have they exposed it to critics (and, more importantly, developers)? And do they have a REAL desire to make it happen?

At the end of his talk, Chris introduces Christopher Makau, broadcast live from his own community. In a clip that lasts less than a minute, Makau illustrates the model perfectly, and does so in such an inspiring fashion that he provokes the TED Global audience to give them both a standing ovation.

Best wishes

Graham Wilson
PS My free ebook, “The Senior Executive’s Emergency Job Hunt“, is available to download now.