Reboot the Manager

The world has changed dramatically over last many decades. However, the role of the manager has remained constant since the industrial revolution. What should be the role of the manager in the new world? Do we need a manager in the first place? What value does a manager bring to the team?

Role, managers are playing today predates back to the command and control mode (primarily derived from Military). In that model, Officer makes all the decisions and gives command to his troops. When that model was brought into the Organizations, Managers made the requisite decisions as they had better understanding of the underlying work. All associates performed similar work. While people were part of the teams, machines (during manufacturing era) were the critical resources. Manager was critical for information flow. He ensured that the requisite information flowed in all directions (from top to down and vice versa). Managers job was primarily as a control – ensure that all the rules were followed; no risks were taken and all procedures complied with. He directed the associates on allocation of work (deciding who does what). He derived significant power because of his position (as he is the primary face of the company to the associates) and expertise (as he knows more about work than any of the associates – atleast deemed that way).

Today, the world has changed. We are in service economy and people (not machines) are the critical resources. Knowledge of the people is critical for the success of the Organizations. Today, associates know more about their work than their managers and hence are the best people to make decisions. The work is so diverse in nature that there cannot be standard procedures to comply with. Today, there is abundance of information (as against lack of it) and for all practical purposes, a CEO can directly email an associate on the floor with a question and get response within minutes. We have sophisticated workflow and MIS (Management Information Systems) that provides an immediate update on the status of work.

However, the role of the Manager has not evolved. Unfortunately, many still tend to operate in the command and control model though the underlying reality has changed. They tend to draw power from their position (without the underlying expertise) and try to exert control on the associates using the power. Associates tend to resist such power usage and this leads to unhealthy conflict amongst the teams and loss of respect for the Manager.

A recent Wall Street Journal article talks about example of an organization that is operating without bosses (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303379204577474953586383604.html) - very radical approach. I think the idea has merit and could be tried in few areas. However, it may not be possible to do so in all spheres of work (and is radical enough that there would be resistance to even accepting such a way is possible). However, I think time has come to question the traditional role of the manager and re-look at what is expected out of her today. In my mind, role of the manager has to dramatically change on the following dimensions:

Control to Facilitator:  Managers should come to terms with the fact that they are not the most knowledgeable people on the team. The associates who perform the work are more aware of the situations and have the necessary expertise to address them. Hence, Manager should move to the role of a Facilitator who facilitates the decisions as against the one making them.

Adherence to Disruptive: In the earlier days, compliance to rules and adherence to procedures is gold standard. However, with the constant change, focus is shifting to disruptive innovation. This would mean that a Manager has to encourage associates to go out of comfort zone and experiment. They should break the rules (try out new approaches). She should encourage associates to take risks and reward them for it (even if that action results in failure). She should be comfortable in dealing with ambiguity (as she may have to support initiatives/plans/actions that may not have a determined outcome but just a possibility). Manager also has to keep connecting the larger organizational context to the work done by the associates so that they can channelize their innovation efforts in the right direction.

Short term to Long Term: Managers in today’s world cannot operate just by focusing on short term. They should be able to balance both short term and long term objectives. Hence, while today’s results are being achieved, they should constantly focus on the implications of the long term (given the changing nature of the world). In order to do so, they should keep abreast of what is changing in the external world and how it impacts their operations.

Manage to Coach: Managers have to transform themselves as coaches. Today, associates do not like to be directed. They like to be engaged and constantly challenged. The peanut butter approach also does not work. They should focus on each of the individuals on the team. Hence, as a Coach, she has to understand the strengths of each of her team members and see how she can leverage these strengths for success of the team. She should also channelize the efforts/energy of the associate to further build on their strengths. As a Coach, she should also understand that the motives/drivers of each of the associate can be different and has to adapt her approach accordingly.

In my mind, a Manager has to first change on these four dimensions to evolve her role to the needs of the modern world. This requires a significant change in her mindset. Her value to the team does not come from her expertise or position but how she could facilitate the team for better success. Do I think we need Managers in today’s world? Yes but in the role of Coaches as against pure managers. What do you think? How do you think Managers have to change to adapt to the new world?

Death of an Expert?

In this fast paced, ever changing world, who would make a good Leader? What is valued most? Is experience in a specific field (that we call Expertise) relevant? What traits would position a Leader to be successful in the future?

World is changing at a very rapid pace. Gone are the days when the changes were cyclical in nature. Today, we are faced with structural changes most of the time. There was a time when an average product life cycle was five years and a business model used to be relevant for atleast 18-20 years. Today, a product is outdated as soon as it hits production and a business model needs to be reinvented every three to five years (or maybe sooner depending on the nature of business). To stay ahead in the race, every company is looking to cannibalize their own products (Example being Samsung with a clearly focused tagline – “What’s Next?”. This tagline has driven the innovation in the company with Samsung launching new models even before the current ones completely percolate into all the markets).

Today, we are seeing three major trends in the world:

Transcending industries: Boundaries between industries are being erased. A company is transcending multiple industries and is foraying into multiple products by leveraging their core strengths. Example being Apple - In which industry do we say Apple is operating in? They are a hardware company, software (within Software, they have an Operating system, Office software, Apple maps, apps), Cloud computing, Music distribution, Telecommunications, Consumer electronics and are foraying into Television with soon to be launched Apple TV (beyond the current version that they have). Another way to think about it is to ask who is a competitor for Apple? We would end up listing multiple companies across multiple industries.

Surprise competition: Competition could be coming in from anywhere and any source. It is not always from a direct competitor. Did camera companies ever expect to see competition from mobile companies? Today, many people opt for camera phones as against buying a separate camera resulting in severe pressure on revenues of camera companies. Similarly, Google search is coming under pressure from Apple’s Siri voice based search; Call center companies are under pressure because of advent of social media that is redefining customer contact/experience; most recently, within India, many of the major bookstores are facing stiff competition from Flipkart (similar to Amazon story); movie industry coming under pressure from television/digital cable; single screens from multiplexes and so on. Could Airtel Money be a competitor for credit cards? (Going back to the previous point of transcending industries – is Airtel a mobile company or a financial company?)

Globalization: Globalization led to huge number of opportunities and challenges at the same time. While it had introduced many new markets and multiple cost bases, it brought in challenges like complexity of dealing with multiple currencies (foreign exchange risk), multiple regulations & regulators, multiple cultures & dealing with different talent/global teams; different customer tastes etc.

In such a scenario, who would be best to lead, say, a telecom company? A Leader with thirty years of experience in the telecommunications industry or one who has traits to be successful in a changing environment? What value is experience, when today telecommunications companies have more revenue from data based services as against voice calls? Average age of the consumer much lower and consumer preferences changing at a very rapid pace?

I believe following traits would be critical for a leader to be successful in the future:

Learning ability: It is critical for Leader to continuously learn from diverse areas and fields. As the opportunities are spread across businesses/industries, Leader has to be constantly open to learning – about new markets; new technologies; business models; cultures; languages (if required); impact of regulations/political changes; new risks etc. Learning could occur from different sources – Reading, Networking, Social media; Videos (Youtube is a great source); Podcasts etc.

Adaptability: With so much of change, Leaders have to constantly adapt and embrace change. Gone are the days, where a Leader puts together 5 year plan and sticks to it. Today, even a yearly plan has to be adapted to changing environment. Hence, embracing change becomes critical to the success of the Leader. This requires the Leader to be willing to change and then to lead the rest of the organization through change management.

Business Savvy: Every Leader has to understand the underlying business model of her business thoroughly and be able to assess the impact of changes occurring in external environment to her business. Keeping the financial goals in mind, she should be able to identify the requisite capabilities she has to build in the Organization. Most important aspect though is in identifying the impact based on external changes. More often than not, this gets missed until very late.

Develop Talent: Biggest differentiator for companies today is the talent they have in the Organization. With innovation happening at a rapid pace, any other value differentiator gets lost very quickly. However, the talent within the organization could make a difference to the success or failure of the company. Hence, Leader who is genuinely interested in the development of people; puts together coaching programs and builds the requisite capabilities would lead her organization to success.

Risk taking: Leader cannot wait for the right opportunity to push forward his business. He has to take risks and create opportunities. While some risks may pay off, others may not. That’s ok. A Leader who takes risks has higher probability of success than a Leader who does not.

I strongly believe that the above traits are more critical for the Leader to be successful than experience in a specific field. It is always great if we can get an individual who has immense experience and has the requisite traits. But if we have to choose one, I choose the required Leadership traits over relevant experience/expertise. What do you think?

Thinking Big - Final Chapter

This is the final article in the series of Thinking Big. In order to understand a concept, it is not just important to know what it is but also to know what it is NOT. While the first two articles explored the facets and examples of Thinking Big, today, we will explore what is NOT Thinking Big. That’s the tricky part. How could we explain what is not thinking Big? While I raked my brain on how to do that, I thought I’d look at missed opportunities as they could have turned things around for the company or would have made it BIG. There is a difference between missed opportunity and failure. Failure is where you have taken risk but it has not paid off. In my mind, that’s good - there is intent of risk that has been exhibited and even if the result is not in line with the expectation, there are enough lessons from that experience that could be leveraged to move forward. However, missed opportunity is where a company has let go of an opportunity without betting on it. I’d like to acknowledge here that we are all smart hindsight but making that decision would have been difficult for the constituents. Having said that, there is always ‘What if’ associated here. Examples of missed opportunities:

Yahoo: Yahoo is currently struggling as a company with multiple changes of CEOs and of strategic directions. However, it had multiple opportunities it missed as a company to make it big. I’d like to highlight two of them. First one is about the opportunity for Yahoo to buy Google.  Having passed over the opportunity of taking over Google search engine when it was initially offered by Larry Page and Sergey Bin, Yahoo tried another bid in summer of 2002. Google was not listed at that time and its revenue was $240 million. Terry Semel, Yahoo CEO at that time approached Larry Page and Sergey Bin to take over Google. Larry and Serge stated their price as $3 billion but mentioned they were not interested to sell. Terry’s team indicated that Google was worth $5 billion and they should push hard. However, Terry Semel disagreed and moved over to Plan B to acquire their own search engine and search-advertising technology to compete for search based ads. Well, we all know the result. Google subsequently went public and is currently operating with a market cap in excess of $180 billion. Similarly, Yahoo made efforts to buy Youtube but could not push forward on it. Eventually, Google bought Youtube and successfully integrated it into its fold.

Second big opportunity it missed was in 2006 when Yahoo sought to buy Facebook. Yahoo CEO Terry Semel almost shook hands with Mark Zuckerberg to buy Facebook for $1 Billion (this was when Facebook was smaller than Myspace – another social portal that went into oblivion). However, Yahoo underperformed on earnings in 2006 and Semel reduced the price offering to Facebook to $800 million. Zuckerberg turned it down. In a subsequent interview, Terry Semel lamented the missed opportunity and felt that Yahoo should have pushed forward with the deal.

We will never know what would have been the present if only Yahoo leveraged these two opportunities. In both the cases, Yahoo was convinced they were good buys but failed to take the necessary risk to pursue the deal. WHAT IF??

India Story: While talking about missed opportunities, I could not resist myself writing about huge number of missed opportunities by India to really make it big. India shining story has always been that of a great future but of a weak present. Even during early years of this century, we talked about India will be a great destination ten years from now, and after ten years, we still say India will be a great destination ten years from now. Inorder to have a strong growth, it was required for the government to make bold decisions and push for strong reforms, but the government backtracked multiple times to appease political interests. That has stalled India story and today, it is being seen as a potential fallen angel of BRIC countries. WHAT IF we have taken risk and pushed for strong reforms and provided good governance? WHAT IF??

Contrast the above examples with that of James Cameroon. He always thought big and made movies in a large scale. He went to Fox studios and pitched to make Romeo and Juliet story on a sinking ship for $150 million. Fox was skeptical but yet gave in to the demands of James Cameroon since they wanted to build a relationship with him. Result was Titanic that earned more than $2 billion. He came back to Fox in 1996 to pitch for the idea of Avatar with a potential release date in 1999. However, he was not happy with the technology that was available and worked on pre-production and production of this film for a decade, with the film eventually hitting the screens in 2009. It instantly turned into a blockbuster and brought in another $2 billion. Imagine spending more than 10 years of your life in pursuit of a goal. You need to be able to dream big, take risks and have great passion. That’s THINKING BIG.

What does all this mean to you? Are you willing to THINK BIG about your life? Are you willing to bet on yourself and take the required risks? THINKING BIG cannot happen if you are not willing to dream big, take risks and have strong self-belief. This world provides a huge number of opportunities to think and make big however, the number of people who capitalize on such opportunities are very few. Are you one of them?

Thinking Big - Michelangelo and Steve Jobs

In the last article, we discussed what ‘Thinking Big’ is and traits that are required to demonstrate it. Today, we will look at examples of two people who demonstrated thinking big - two people who are impactful and changed the course of the world; two people who left a legacy behind that is/will be remembered over centuries; two people who lived 500 years apart yet are very similar – Michelangelo, an artist and Steve Jobs who considered his work as form of art.

Michelangelo (1475 – 1564) is one of the great artists of the renaissance period. He transcended multiple forms of art – Sculpture, Painting, Architecture, Poet and created masterpieces that the world is in awe of. He is one of the best documented artists of the 16^th century. Two of his best known works – Pieta and David were sculpted before he turned thirty. His other famous works include Painting on ceiling of Sistine Chapel and Last Judgment on the altar wall of Sistine chapel; Sculpting of Madonna of the stairs, Battle of centaurs, Day and Night, Moses, Rebellious slave, Dying slave; and as an architect, architectural design of St Peters Basilica and its famous dome. Steve Jobs (1955 – 2011) life is well chronicled and read by many of us.

Steve Jobs and Michelangelo share many characteristics and their lives are very similar:

·        Michelangelo transcended multiple areas like Sculpting, Painting, Architecture, Engineering and Poetry. Steve Jobs transcended multiple industries like Personal computing, Animation movies, Music, Telecommunication and Tablets

·        Michelangelo and Steve Jobs were considered egotists but they displayed great passion towards their work and created masterpieces (or world-class products)

·        Michelangelo and Steve Jobs demonstrated their flair for big picture thinking while having great attention to detail. Michelangelo products (Pieta, David, Sistine chapel paintings) are marveled both for the concept and their design. Similarly, Apple products are marveled both for their concept (usage) and simplified design

·        Both of them strived for perfection. There are innumerable stories on how Michelangelo broke many of his own sculptures and destroyed paintings as he was not happy with the finished product (while others felt that they were outstanding). Similarly, Steve Jobs delayed multiple product launches as he was not happy with the finished product, few examples being launch of iPad and launch of Apple stores

·        Both have seen major failures in their lives. Michelangelo faced the ire of Florentines when he left Florence during political upheaval but returned back to Florence to take up 40 year old unfinished project. He worked on it for three years and sculpted David to create a masterpiece that symbolizes defense of civil liberties and gave hope to Florentines. Similarly, Steve Jobs has been ousted from Apple (a company he co-founded) but returned to it to make it one of the most valuable companies in the world.

Thinking Big is inherent in Michelangelo and Steve Jobs. To illustrate it better, I’ll take few incidents from their lives and showcase the traits of thinking BIG.

Ø    When Pope Julius II awarded Michelangelo with the commission of painting Sistine Chapel, Michelangelo was taken aback. He was a sculptor and not a painter. However, to the surprise of many, he had taken the commission and negotiated with Pope to change the concept. Instead of painting twelve figures of apostles, as was the original mandate, Michelangelo convinced Pope to allow him to paint episodes from book of Genesis. For five years, Michelangelo worked on this fresco. He had to paint on a wet plaster, lying on a scaffolding seventy feet from the ground, while the water, paint dripped on his face. He fell sick multiple times during that period but never gave up. He painted 300 figures, and at its center nine episodes from book of Genesis, divided into three groups – God’s creation of earth, God’s creation of humankind and their fall from God’s grace. When he unveiled the fresco, it was regarded as a masterpiece and brought in new approach to fresco painting that was followed by many others. Traits exhibited by Michelangelo are Risk taking, Optimism, Perfection, Self-belief

Ø    When Steve Jobs was ousted from Apple, he founded NeXT computer. While his company developed technologically advanced machines, their sales were limited. NeXT ventured into development of operating system (that later became the basis for iOS) and WebObjects (that laid the foundation for Apple store, MobileMe and iTunes store). He also bought Pixar and invested heavily in Toy Story (re-drafted the story board to make it bigger, friendlier). This has laid the foundation to revolutionize animation movies that subsequently saw blockbusters like A Bug’s life, Toy Story 2, Monsters, Finding Nemo, Incredibles, Cars, WALL-E, and Toy Story 3. Steve Jobs talked about this period of life in his Stanford speech. In his own words “The heaviness of being successful was replaced by the lightness of being a beginner again, less sure about everything. It freed me to enter one of the most creative periods of my life. I am pretty sure none of this would have happened if I hadn’t been fired from Apple. It was awful-tasting medicine but the patient needed it”. Traits exhibited are Contrarian, Risk taking, Optimism, Self-belief

Ø    When he was 23 years old, Michelangelo was given charge of sculpting Pieta (Pity in Italian that shows Virgin Mary holding the dead body of Jesus Christ). Instead of revealing extreme grief, Mary is restrained and her expression is one of resignation. He completed the sculpture before he was 25 years old and people immediately called it a masterpiece. They marveled at intricate details like muscles, veins nerves and facial emotions being depicted in a sculpture. This sculpture is marveled even today, after 500 years. Similarly, when Michelangelo was commissioned for painting Last Judgment on altar wall of Sistine Chapel, he worked on to create a master piece for four years. It was one of the largest paintings of the renaissance period that depicted humanity face to face with salvation. People visit Vatican museum (that includes tour of Sistine chapel) and St Peter’s Basilica even today to see these masterpieces. Traits exhibited are Risk taking, Perfection, Optimism, Self-belief

There are many more such incidents from their lives. Michelangelo and Steve Jobs demonstrated Contrarian, Risk taking, Optimism, Perfection and Self-belief throughout their life. This has set them apart from the rest. They are great people that left a wonderful legacy behind for us to follow. Thinking Big would set us apart from the rest and enables success in our lives. My perspective is best embodied by the following lyrics from late 1990s ‘Think Different’ campaign of Apple:

“Here’s to the Crazy Ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes...
The ones who see things differently
they’re not fond of rules
and they have no respect for the status quo.
You can quote them, disagree with them,
disbelieve them, glorify or vilify them;
about the only thing that you can’t do is ignore them…
Because they change things…
They invent, they imagine, they heal, they explore, they create, they inspire.
They push the human race forward.
Maybe they have to be crazy.
How else can you stare at an empty canvas and see a work of art?
Or, sit in silence and hear a song that hasn’t been written?
Or, gaze at a red planet and see a laboratory on wheels?
While some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius.
Because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world,
are the ones who do.”

Thinking Big

I just returned from a 2 week vacation of Paris & Italy (Venice, Florence and Rome) and I am Inspired. That’s the last thing I expected from a vacation. But, after seeing some of the wonders of the world and works of great people, there was no way I could not be inspired. Eiffel Tower, Leaning tower of Pisa, Pantheon, Coliseum, Mona Lisa, Pieta, Last Judgment, and St Peter’s Basilica, and many other Frescos, Paintings, Sculptures, architecture left me wondering about the thought process of the people behind these achievements. One common theme that kept coming back to me as I went from one place to another was about thinking big. None of these could have been achieved without Thinking Big.

Imagine conceptualizing and executing Coliseum that can accommodate fifty thousand people, about two thousand years ago when concepts like gravitational force, fulcrum, motion and other science concepts were not even in place. Building a structure that is 1,050 feet tall as an entrance archway to the world fair in 1889 knowing that it would be temporary (Eiffel tower); Working for four years on a single piece of fresco (which is not your primary skill and are not known for it) that has become a master piece (Last Judgment in Sistine Chapel by Michelangelo) are all examples of thinking big.

 Inspired by this visit, I’d like to write series of blogs on thinking big. While today’s blog is focused on some of the key traits of thinking big, over next few weeks, I’d like to introduce people like Michelangelo, Leonardo Da Vinci, Raphael, and many others on how they thought big. This is more about my own learning as I believe the best way to learn is through sharing the knowledge.

Thinking Big is about setting goals that are way beyond the current realm of possibilities and striving towards achieving them. We start with an intent that is big – not driven by current capabilities or possibilities but from what we would like to achieve (a clear definition of end state that we aspire for). Having the intent in place, all our actions should be oriented towards achieving the intent (in a future article, I’ll discuss power of intention).

What makes thinking big so difficult? Why do some people are good at thinking big while many others struggle to push the limits? In order to think big, it is important to have the following traits;

Contrarian – we should be able to go beyond conventional wisdom. Follow uncharted paths and operate outside of our comfort zone. This is not easy but is required. Conventional wisdom limits our thinking ability. It does not encourage us to push our limits. We should continuously challenge the status quo and push the limits. Following uncharted paths will lead us to newer avenues/opportunities. Even if there are challenges, the learning that we derive from those experiences will help us to be more successful in the future. Hence, we should always explore uncharted paths than following conventional wisdom.

Risk taking – we cannot think/achieve big by playing safe. We should take risks. Most people do not take risks due to fear – Fear of Failure and Fear of criticism. Failure – we covered in an earlier blog that failure is good. History of any successful person in the world shows that they have dealt with failure. As for criticism, people who think big are always in minority. Hence, there will always be criticism (or skepticism). People will laugh at us from behind. But that’s ok. History has also proven that people who criticize are the same people who marvel when they see the achievements. When Eiffel tower design was announced, there was a huge uproar against it stating that a wrought iron monument would spoil the landscape of Paris that has many historical monuments like arc de triumph, Louvre museum etc. However, Gustave Eiffel stuck with the task of building Eiffel tower that has now become a major landmark of Paris.

Optimistic – Thinking big can only be achieved by looking at opportunities, not constraints. Constraints are everywhere. If there are no constraints, then this would become a perfect world. Hence, it is important to focus more on opportunities than getting bogged down by the constraints. When leaning tower of Pisa was built up to the third floor; it sunk into the ground due to weak foundation. Most people have asked the tower to be shelved and a new tower to be built. However Giovanne di Simone saw an opportunity and re-designed the architecture of the tower to build floors four to seven with one side taller than the other to compensate for the tilt. Thanks to its sinking & leaning, it has become world famous and the re-designed architecture enabled it to last more than 800 years. If the tower was not leaning, there would not have been any tourists visiting the tower.

Perfection – People who think big are not easily satisfied. They are difficult to impress. They always strive for perfection. They look to make things that are world class (best in class) and are always looking to make a difference. They would like to make a statement through their work and are willing to be focused, patient and put in lot of hard work to achieve it. When Michelangelo was given the task of painting altar wall of Sistine chapel, he spent four years to paint Last Judgment.  It was a fresco (mural painting executed on a wet plaster of the wall so that when it dries, it shows as a painting on the wall). He spent four years of his life on this one single fresco and was focused on turning it into a master piece. Today, many tourists visit Sistine chapel (and even Vatican museum) just to see Michelangelo paintings. That’s perfection.

Self-belief – Most important attribute of thinking big is having self-belief. As I keep saying to many people with whom I interact - if you do not have confidence in yourself, then how someone else can have confidence in you? It is ironical that we always underestimate ourselves. We should have self-confidence and belief that we are indeed best in the world (well… some might say that is over confidence but I’d any day be on the side of over confidence than no confidence). We should always be willing to learn, have passion for excellence and be enthusiastic.

Thinking Big is important as it drives our lives and actions and catapults us into a different league. Most people are not able to achieve success, not because of the limitation of their capabilities but due to their inability to think big. Thinking Big sets people apart and is an enabler for success. How BIG can you THINK?

Feedback - Managing difficult conversations

Feedback – a process that, incidentally, both the person who is giving and one who is receiving dread. What makes feedback so difficult for both the parties? It is primarily because both people do not know what to expect. When the associate walks into the room, she is unsure of how her manager interpreted her performance over the period. Similarly, manager is unsure of how her comments would be received by the associate. Both the parties are walking into the room expecting a confrontation, which creates a tense environment. Not a great place to begin having a feedback conversation.

Let me play out a typical scenario:

Raj (Manager) walks into the room to have feedback conversation with Jennie (associate). Raj is confident as he has prepared well for the meeting. He has all the details, data points captured well. He structured his conversation with all the right words. He sits down with Jennie and takes her through his evaluation. Jennie interrupts multiple times to ask questions. They disagree on many points as she has a different interpretation of the events from Raj. Raj, being the manager, finally prevails, gives her the rating, talks about what Jennie should be focusing on for next 6 months. Raj walks out of the meeting relieved that it is finally over and that Jennie would work on the action items for next 6 months. Jennie walks out of the meeting feeling angry that her performance has not been evaluated right and since there is no buy in on the points mentioned by Raj, there are no action items for her.

Where did this conversation end? What is the outcome of the time spent by both the manager and the associate? For both of them, it is an ordeal that has to be done with. Raj can now focus on other things for next 6 months and for Jennie, she will get over her anger (over time or through a role/job change) until it is time to have another conversation with her (old/new) manager.

How could this change where the feedback conversation is not an event but a process? Into a meeting that both the manager and associate could look forward to, a conversation that could translate the potential of the associate into performance, a conversation that would setup the associate for greater success?

Following are few building blocks that could make this conversation more effective:

Trust – Foundation for any effective interaction is trust. There has to be trust between manager and associate. Manager trusting associate that he/she has the right intent, willing to do what is right for the organization and for herself; and associate trusting manager that he has the right intent and is willing to invest in associate to be successful. More often than not, we find this missing. There are always questions about the intent. Manager has to take the first step to build this trust. This has to be done over a period of time (and not just at the merit or bonus time). Manager has to invest time to understand the associate – who she is, her aspirations, objectives, strengths, weaknesses, what excites her and what would not interest her etc. The best way to do this is through Listening. We usually find managers talk more while associates listen. To build trust and to understand the associate, it is important for manager to listen and for associate to talk. This should ideally be done through frequent short conversations as against one very long conversation.

Timely – It is important that manager shares his observations in a timely manner - as soon as he observes – both good and not so good behaviors/actions/outcomes. None of us are perfect and there are areas where we do well and areas we struggle. Manager has to be objective and share his observations with the associate in a timely manner. Doing it once in 3, 6 or 12 months brings in recent effect (where only actions/outcomes of the recent past are remembered or measured).

Fact based – While sharing observations it is important for Manager to be fact based. The conversation has to be data driven (as against based on interpretations). Managers always have to be cognizant on where they are operating on ladder of inference. Higher we are on the ladder, we are looking at the events based on filters/lens that we wear and hence we would be on a very slippery ground. It is important for manager just to be focused on the underlying data (without any filters). How many times have we seen that a manager does not find any weaknesses in a top performer and does not find any strong areas in a weak performer? Manager has to be data driven to ensure that there is a balanced view.

Team approach – Manager and associate have to work together as a team. It is important for the manager to give an opportunity to the associate to react to the data points (Note: Not interpretations). Manager and associate have to come to an agreement on what has worked well and what are the opportunities for the future. Through this approach, if there are certain points that do not have an agreement, it is ok. They should agree on an approach to observe together in those areas and to bring them up in their regular 1-1s. For the areas (both strengths and weaknesses) that they have agreement on, they should formulate an action plan and work on it. Action plan should have items both for the associate and for the manager.

Future oriented – One key aspect of any feedback conversation is that it should be future oriented. Past is gone and nothing can change it. It is important to focus the conversation on how it could mean a better future for both the associate and the manager as against focusing on the past mistakes/outcomes.

The above steps would make the feedback, a conversation that both the manager and the associate look forward to, a conversation that would happen many times a year (as against just around merit or bonus). More importantly, these steps would make feedback an easy and healthy conversation and such conversations would have significant impact on retention. How has been your experience on giving/receiving feedback?

Leadership Beliefs

I need to start by acknowledging that I had my first failure in the series of blogs. I made a commitment to myself that I’d write a blog once every 2 weeks. While I met that commitment through the first quarter of the year, I failed to deliver on it last weekend. I could state many reasons why I could not write the blog but the reality is I missed it and that’s not acceptable to me. I learnt a very valuable lesson and such a miss will not happen in the future.

This week, I take the opportunity to share my leadership beliefs. I thought it would be a simple task to just put them on a paper but as I started on it, I realized it was difficult – not because I did not know what they are, but to put them on a paper is like committing them and I had to be honest with myself whether I truly believed in them and do I practice them most of the time. So here they are (not exhaustive but few key ones that I strongly believe in):

1.       People should respect you for who you are, not for what you are – This definitely is one of the most important beliefs of mine. ‘What you are’ is primarily determined by the title, position that we carry. Any respect we get because of our position is limited for the period of time we hold that position. People should respect us for what we stand for, for our values and more importantly, for value we are able to add to them. The key part is to ensure that we are authentic in all our interactions. This ensures that we gain the respect even when we do not carry the title or position.

2.       Learning is a journey – It is important to continuously learn in our life. Learning ensures progression (not of title/compensation but of our mind). It’s a journey and as long as we are open, we can find many sources that we can learn from. These could be books, web, videos but the best sources are our colleagues, associates, managers, mentors, coaches and friends. There is an insurmountable experience around us and we just need to keep our mind open and it will get filled with many learning. Always ask – What did I learn today?

3.       Prioritization in life – This is a key takeaway from Transformational Leadership program that I attended last year at ISB and I was blown away by it. We all have to juggle multiple balls in our life and it is always difficult to manage all of them in an appropriate way (primarily due to lack of time). The best way to prioritize is to determine which of the balls that we are juggling are glass balls and which are rubber balls. A rubber ball can always bounce back and we would have a future opportunity to still put them in play; however if a glass ball drops, then we would lose it forever. Examples of glass balls in our lives are Family, Health, Friends – those interestingly are the ones that we usually ignore.

4.       Staying with the question – One of the biggest fallacies of human beings is that we like status quo. Whenever we are not in equilibrium, we feel highly uncomfortable and strive to come back to that position as quickly as possible. Hence, when we are faced with a difficult question, we tend to rationalize it by attributing a response. Similarly, when we come across two different, divergent view points, we just lean towards one and accept/acknowledge it while ignoring any data that drives us to the other view point. It is critical to understand that an intelligent mind is one that can hold two equally opposing thoughts at the same time. It is important to stay with the question. Stay in the uncomfortable zone and let new ideas/thoughts emerge. Enjoy the butterflies in the stomach. This would lead to success.

5.       Everyone is talented – Popular western management practice on people state that it is important to segment people into multiple categories to better manage them. But the reality is everyone in this world is talented. Every human being who comes into this world comes with certain strengths of their own. It is important for people to realize what their strengths are and should find opportunities that can leverage on them. Doing this would ensure success. However, we find many people trying to follow or replicate others in the pursuit of success, while ignoring their own attributes. It does lot more good to look inside for answers than outside.

6.       Definition of Success – Definition of success is relative and it is driven by what gives you happiness as against what others think of you. We all have two scorecards – Internal and External. Internal scorecard is focused on what’s important to us while external scorecard is focused on what others think of us. If we are constantly driven by external scorecard, we may put ourselves in a situation where we are living our life to meet others expectations as against our own happiness. Hence, it is important to ensure that we meet and exceed our Internal Scorecards. Go ahead and pursue your passions. Pursuing passions would enable us to score high on internal scorecard and at the end of the day, that scorecard is more important than the other one.

Well, these are not exhaustive but I thought I’ll write those that are important to me. When I started to write, I thought I would pen down Leadership beliefs. However, I now realize that these are my personal beliefs that characterize my Leadership. Penning these down has given a lot deal of clarity to me. What are your beliefs and are you practicing them? Please do share. We can all learn from each other.