Tag: Leadership

  • What’s Your Role In Meetings?

    What’s Your Role In Meetings?

    Timely lessons from the CEO of Spotify, Daniel Ek, on how to be a more effective leader in meetings.

    As I am spending more time in virtual meetings, I’m reflecting on how this time can be spent more effectively. I recently listened to the conversation Tim Ferriss had with Daniel Ek, COE Spotify, where Daniel shared his approach. Below is an extract of the conversation, and you can listen to the entire interview on The Tim Ferriss Show, episode #448. 3 December 2020

    Tim Ferris:  I want to give an example of one question, that might, I don’t want to say surprise people, but be noticeably lacking from the mindscape have a lot of people from, from day to day. And this is, this is the question of. What your role is at a given meeting. What is my role. And I’ve read about your contemplation of this, of this question, but when you go into a meeting, what different roles might you have and why is it important to be clear beforehand on what your role is? If we actually take a step back and we think about work for a moment, and we think about work for knowledge workers, because it’s clearly different. The reality is a lot of knowledge workers that work in companies. 

    Daniel Ek:  Most of the work that they’re doing is done. In meetings. Some of us do some actual other work too, but a lot of it ends up being in meetings. And it’s surprising to me that we spend as little time as we do. On actually thinking about the meetings, we’re having, if they’re productive if they’re worthwhile, and if they’re delivering on. What the ambition was. And I can only say that when you survey people that attend, when you ask if the meeting was effective or not, most people actually say that meetings are wasteful and yet we see more and more and more of it. And so. I like to think that a huge point of optimization can be done by designing better meetings for people. And. 

    You know, early on, it started with my own sort of process at Spotify, not just thinking about how much time we were wasting, but frankly, In a meeting. What I found myself many times in was maybe meeting a person in the company. That had done a tremendous job, putting together a presentation of some kind. And if I put myself in that person’s shoe, this is a person that may get a meeting with me, maybe once, maybe twice during their entire career at Spotify. And for that person, it could be the chance to get noticed for a future promotion. It could be the chance to have a, something that fundamentally changes their career. And so, it oftentimes what ended up happening was the. 

    Person came in. And they ran through a PowerPoint that someone had sent me the night before I had already read it. And they in verbatim read that the entire thing. And then in the end, that would be a short period of time. Usually less than 10% of the meeting was spent on that. Of us discussing what the next steps would be. Again, I understand why this happens, because again, the person that’s presenting this have all the incentives to kind of show off the good work that they’re doing and wanting to seem very competent and realize that a lot is on the line, et cetera. And instead, what I find is that’s, uh, quite often we haven’t been intentful about why the meeting exists to begin with. And in this case, if it’s recognition, we want to give I’m sure there could have been a better way you could have done. 

    That, and we should have been clear that we were having a review meeting about the progress of a certain area, and it should have been clear too, that this person is an amazing individual and that we should all try to give constructive criticism. But then in the end also give. Feedback positive feedback as well, because we want to make sure this person feels valued. 

    But oftentimes all of that context. It doesn’t exist. And so, my role in that meeting could sometimes be just being that person who says that kind of thing, but it really relies more often than not that I, to prep people. On how to do meetings. And set it up. Like I do read the meeting material beforehand. I prefer spending only five minutes in the beginning. 

    Rereading the material or the person reading it, a summary out of it. And States the reason for the meeting upfront. And then we can spend more time talking about where are these, the right questions? Should we have considered something else? And what are the appropriate next steps? But you can be an approver, or you can be consultant. You can be informed in a meeting. And I think many people always think that if you’re the CEO, your job is always to be the approver in the meeting. But I find if you have a great team, that’s not at all the role you should have, you should be sometimes the person who is only consulted about what they’re doing as an FYI. Sometimes you can be the person who just isn’t the decider because there’s someone more competent making that decision. 

    But you could be a person who is the sounding board where you can bounce ideas off. If we’re thinking aggressive enough, if you’re thinking. Roughly in this dimension, should we invest a lot? Should we invest a little in that decision? And all those things is highly contextual and your role in those meetings could be very different depending on. 

    All of those variables and being clear and upfront about that meetings can have different forms. I think has profoundly changed how I look at meetings. And I think a lot of people at Spotify too. 

  • A seed of doubt can destroy your performance. What’s your mind set strategy?

    A seed of doubt can destroy your performance. What’s your mind set strategy?

    In the 2012 America’s Cup Regatta, the New Zealand crew was leading the American crew by 8 races to 1 and only had to win one more race. One more win to take home the oldest trophy in world sport. The evening before the next day’s racing, James Spithill, captain of the American crew, was asked how he can stay motivated in the face of certain defeat. Spithill’s response was telling in more than only his response.

    “I think the question is: imagine if these guys lost from here? What an upset that would be. They have almost got it in the bag.”

    “That’s my motivation. That would be one hell of a story, that would be one hell of a comeback and that’s the sort of thing that I’d like to be part of. We feel we have got just as much chance of winning this and we are going to do everything we can.”

    James Spithill, Team Oracle

    Facing match point at 8-1, the US crew led by Spithill, clawed their way back and then simply powered their way past the Kiwis with increasing power and precision to win 9-8 on the scoreboard. What the Oracle crew achieved, is widely recognised as the biggest comeback ever in the history of international sport.

    “To come from behind, these guys just showed so much heart… They are so great . . . to be facing the barrel of the gun at 8-1 what did the guys do? They didn’t even flinch.”

    James Spithill, Team Oracle

    Where Spithill rose to the occasion and accepted the challenge and motivation to “win it from here”, the competition crumbled. No doubt Spithill is an amazing talent and high performer. He is a World Sailor of the Year, Australian Sailor of the Year, and the youngest skipper to win the America’s Cup, which he won twice and consecutively (2010 & 2013). Yet more than his skill and talent, was his grit and a mindset, that focussed on the task at hand. Rather than focussing on the competition, Spithill focused on the performance required to win. His mind was clear of any negative ‘clutter‘ and zoomed in on his performance and the performance of the crew, and the result would take care of itself.

    It’s not unusual, in business, life and sport, to be faced with what appears to be insurmountable challenges. What’s your strategy? How do you prepare your mind set for that big meeting, negotiation or race?

    Join me with 6 x Olympic strength & performance coach Mick Miller, for an introduction into how the world’s best prepare their mind set for high performance. It’s a virtual meeting held on Zoom, and you can register via clicking on the links below.

    High Performance Mindset Introduction (USA & ANZ)

    When: Aug 15, 2020 10:00 PM Zurich – mid to late afternoon USA time

    Register in advance for this meeting:
    https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZEvcO2urDgtHd1Z2HxWGEUuicdySDZ3f9To

    High Performance Mindset Introduction (Europe & ANZ)

    When: Aug 22, 2020 11:00 AM Zurich – afternoon & evening in Australia and New Zealand

    Register in advance for this meeting:
    https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZApdOupqzovGdYrPvdDKMOMeKn7OcSlVEow

    After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting.

    Bill Chambers is a High Performance Coach, helping executives and athletes in their pursuit of excellence.

    Photos by Getty images. Video curtsey of YouTube.

  • What we can learn from Starbucks leadership & approach to Covid-19

    What we can learn from Starbucks leadership & approach to Covid-19

    Amidst the Covid-19 coronavirus outbreak with bans, border closures, lockdowns, many companies are struggling as the situation goes from bad to worse. So what can we learn from Starbucks and their approach?

    Why Starbucks, because I thought they are a good example of a company that has been hit massively in China and the rest of the world by Covid-19. They have developed an approach and a playbook from what they have learnt and they are applying and learning from what is going on in real time with success.

    Secured safety of the team first

    I believe we can all learn a lot from the clear leadership of Starbucks CEO, Kevin Johnston. He set the standard for both protecting employees as well as the company with a ‘both and’ solution – protecting employees incomes as well as avoiding the re-hire and re-training costs when we all get through these times and ‘back to normal’.

    Communicate the plan clearly

    Johnston was fast to ensure Starbucks employees knew that they were secure for at least the next 30-days, they knew the plan of attack and equally as important, Johnson was great in communicating the plan to Wall Street and investors.

    “Partners are the heartbeat of Starbucks, and we will continue to do whatever we can to support them… I am optimistic that together we can overcome this challenge. The human experience is about overcoming adversity by being resilient, and that is certainly on display across the nation. We will overcome this. Our resilience will be rewarded.”

    Kevin Johnston, CEO

    Agile approach to apply learnings from China fast

    Starbucks’ recent experience dealing with Covid-19 in China offers clues as to the company can proceed in other markets. At the peak of the outbreak in China, around 80% of stores had to close. CEO Kevin Johnson recently described how management tackled various challenges,

    “Our team in China defined elevated cleaning protocols for stores and leveraged new customer experiences, such as contactless pickup and mobile order for pickup or delivery.”

    Kevin Johnson CEO

    As the outbreak subsided in China, over 90% of Starbucks stores have reopened under modified hours and conditions and Starbucks are using the approach developed in China for stores now facing Covid-19. they are keeping their drive through service open and constantly refining the ‘playbook’ as they learn more. Employees are turning up and customers can buy on Starbucks app and collect.

    Planning for tomorrow today. Starbuck focus on Digital & AI

    Called the Digital Flywheel Program, Starbucks implemented AI technology some time ago with it’s Rewards members’ accounts, considering factors like order history, current weather conditions, time of day, whether it’s a weekend or a workday, and even if it’s a customer’s birthday in order to make drink and food suggestions. They are now leveraging this data to keep the communication going directly to their customers in a meaningful and relevant way.

    By combining AI with marketing, Starbucks has managed to grow and expand its Starbucks Rewards program that has 17.2 million active members, and the growing at 14% year over year. In China alone, the member base has crossed the 10 million mark with +45% year-over-year growth.

    Personalization

    The Starbucks Rewards program gathers a huge amount of data on customer spending and preferences and this means that Starbucks is able to personalise the experience for each and every customer based on their unique preferences and spending habits. The AI mines the data to let customers know which store is open for take out coffee or to suggest new food or drink choices and customise recommendations according to the time of day.

    The system also allows for personalised marketing and offers discounts to engage customers to keep coming back. Real-time triggers and push notifications create a deeper level of connection with customers. Users get a sense that Starbucks is aware of their preferences and is tailoring the experience to make it more fulfilling.

    Key Points

    • Starbucks documented and systemised the approach used in China knowing that they would need it later
    • Fast to roll-out the approach in a localised way to other markets
    • Tracked and measured the impact of Covid-19 locally vs the play book models and approach
    • Protected their employees first and made sure they are safe and there for the long haul
    • Invested in local communities to support them and create a positive ‘social movement’ around Starbucks
    • Clearly and consistently communicated the plan to employees, customers and investors
    • Keep the cash flow coming with take out orders
    • Doubled down on Digital and AI to communicate with customers and employees
  • Why managers are even more important than ever before.

    Why managers are even more important than ever before.

    By GREG MCKENNA FEB 28, 2019 Business Insider Magazine

    How managers can harness the autonomy of the individuals and groups working throughout the organisation by “creating an environment where people have an interest in deploying their autonomy in the service of cooperation with others for the greater good of the organization.” 

    If there is one mantra which seems consistent across the literature and experience of running a company in the new economy (and as companies make more effort to digitise themselves) it’s that technology is just the enabler. 

    People and culture are still the keys to success. 

    What’s intriguing though is that while you’ll read that a business must now have flatter structures and less reliance on command and control type management, defining what managers do in this changing environment seems to be of secondary importance. 

    Business leaders and managers are assumed to simply get out the way of their new Agile teams of workers. 

    Not so, says Yves Morieux, Boston Consulting Group’s senior partner and managing director at the firms Dubai office, in “Bringing Managers Back to Work”

    He says, contrary to popular belief:

    “The challenge of the organizational revolution represented by agile and other new approaches is not that they make management somehow irrelevant or obsolete. Quite the opposite: they make management more important than ever before. But they also transform what managers—from the very top of the organization to the frontline of the business—have to do and how they need to work… until organizations develop a management model that is equal to the challenges of the organizational revolution taking place today, that revolution won’t be successful.”

    His approach is to encourage business managers to rethink their role in the organisation.

    “Put simply, they need to stop thinking of themselves as the master designers of hardwired organizational structures, processes, rules, and procedures. Instead, they need to become the everyday orchestrators of a flexible and dynamic behavioral system, one that unleashes employees’ autonomy and initiative, and puts it in the service of more effective cooperation to achieve the organization’s goals,” Morieux wrote. 

    That’s a big step, but an important one because without it, what managers tend to do is fall back on a variation of the command and control model which, Morieux says, “is singularly ineffective at addressing the distinguishing feature of today’s business environment: the exponential increase in business complexity.”

    At issue he says is that as complexity increases “the correspondence between the organization’s formal procedures and its business outcomes begins to fall apart.” 

    That is, “products need to be affordable but also of high quality. Manufacturing plants have to be efficient but also safe. Business processes require speed but also reliability,”.

    The trouble is many business leaders, managers, and the companies they run fall back on “more rules, processes, and guidelines for each new performance objective” which has the effect of increasing “organisational complicatedness”. Morieux defines this as “the proliferation of contradictory rules and instructions” which he says “causes people to lose their sense of direction and to escalate decisions to committees or to senior leaders, who have no direct knowledge of the issues at hand”. 

    Sound familiar? As a result Morieux says that managers end up managing the “complicatedness, not the work itself”. 

    But, he has a fix for this. 

    The key is to harness the autonomy of the individuals and groups working throughout the organisation by “creating an environment where people have an interest in deploying their autonomy in the service of cooperation with others for the greater good of the organization.” 

    Naturally this combination of autonomy and co-operation is somewhat at odds and won’t happen on its own. 

    Morieux says it needs a “particular kind of management” which instead of focusing on “formal procedures” sees managers paying attention to the “the behavioral dynamics that shape organizational performance: why people do what they do; how they understand their individual goals, the resources available to them to achieve those goals, the constraints that stand in their way; and how individual behaviors combine (often in unanticipated ways) to produce the collective behavior underlying performance.” 

    Of course the managers themselves are actors in this behavioural system and shapers of the company narrative, so “they need to know how to intervene in that system in order to foster more effective cooperation. And to do that, they must get much closer to the actual work.”

    To do this Morieux has a three step process where managers intervene in the company’s behavioural system. 

    Framing through action

    Morieux says:

    “In the new work environment, the separation of design and execution is replaced by the combination of framing and acting. Rather than design tasks, managers “frame” objectives and goals. That framing sets the context that allows employees not so much to execute but to “act” — that is, exercise initiative guided by strategic goals, not rigid processes and rules; operate more autonomously, making decisions in the moment in response to changing circumstances and unanticipated obstacles or opportunities; and work together to make the trade-offs that will create the most value over time”.

    He says framing is an iterative process because of the “dynamic and fluid” operating environment businesses find themselves in and as such, managers need to be constantly acting to intervene in the company’s behavioural system. 

    “Framing doesn’t happen once; it happens continually, in close interaction with employees, and in response to the constantly changing circumstances thrown up by the work people do and the challenges they face in the ongoing effort to create value” Morieux wrote. 

    Integrating around the task

    Morieux highlights what he calls the “paradox of specialisation” where complexity drives specialised functions and teams across the business but that these teams need to find a way to converse and cooperate across their various functions outside of “their specialised mindsets”. 

    As a result he says managers need to “make sure cooperation happens, people work together productively on the task, and they make the trade-offs necessary to create value across multiple performance objectives”.

    Thus he says management is now “less about ‘managing people’ (in the sense of reporting relationships, career progression, performance evaluation, and the like) than it is about ‘managing behavior’ (in the sense of creating an environment in which people find it desirable to devote their full effort to the task at hand, to exercise initiative, to cooperate constructively with their colleagues)”.

    Shaping the organisational context

    The idea that in the new environment managers just set teams up and get out of their way is flawed, Morieux says, because it “underestimates the complexity of the senior management role in the new work environment. Ceding control to self-managed teams doesn’t mean abandoning them.” 

    His point is the role of a senior manager “is not to determine the content of people’s work. Rather, it is to provide the context for that work. That means helping employees understand how their immediate objectives relate to the organization’s strategic and business goals.” 

    That means “senior managers need to articulate a robust strategic context that teams can use as a ‘North Star’ that aligns their autonomy to those goals, guiding them as they exercise their initiative,” he says.

    Crucially though senior managers need to be more present and get involved with the teams more often by “regularly interacting with teams and being present as a sounding board and ‘thought partner’”. More important still, senior managers “need to be engaged enough with the work of teams to have at least a first-order understanding of the on-the-ground obstacles, to recognize potential missteps, and to help teams course-correct” Morieux says. 

    What’s interesting about Morieux’s work is that it feeds from and reinforces the notion that tech is the enabler, but that culture and people are the keys to success in the new business environment. What Morieux has done, where many writers have not, is put important organisational context around just how managers fit into the new operating environment and what they need to do to ensure they, their staff, and the business are as successful as they can be.


    Read more at Businessinsider.com.au

    https://www.businessinsider.com.au/management-in-a-digital-world-is-becoming-more-not-less-relevant-2019-2#lBYp8vvyByZk78W8.99

  • Conversations around Self Managed Teams

    Conversations around Self Managed Teams

    In conversations whilst planning new ways of working for sales organisations, one of the team surfaced maxims from Myron Rogers, a leader in systems thinking. Reminded the team of how Self Managed Teams can and will thrive.

    • People own what they help create

    • Real change happens in real work

    • Those who do the work, do the change

    • Connect the system to more of itself

    • Start anywhere, follow everywhere

    • The process you use to get to the future is the future you get.

    Image McKinsey (Jan 2018)

  • Four truths about people & change

    Four truths about people & change

    In briefing some new leaders involved in transformational change, we entered a great discussion around people and change. It’s sometimes nice to reconnect with some truths. Change can be complex and often engaging and creating space for cooperation can cut through complexity.

    1. People will support what they help to create. (Weisbord, 1987)
    2. People do not resist change; people resist being changed. (Richard Beckhard)
    3. Activating the self-energizing commitment and energy of people around changes they deeply care about has been the key to the many successes that have been achieved. (Senge 1999)
    4. It’s easier to act your way in to a new way of thinking, than to think your way into a new way of acting. (Lisa Kimball)
  • Finding your natural fit in order to do what you love to do everyday.

    Finding your natural fit in order to do what you love to do everyday.

    Listening to Jim Collins on the Tim Ferris podcast last week, I was reminded of the elegant simplicity in which Colin’s frames complex subjects. In this case, the Hedgehog Concept.

    The concept of the three circles, or the Hedgehog Concept posited by Jim Collins, is a powerful framework for individuals looking to determine what they should be focusing on in work.

    Collins invites you to imagine you were able to get or construct work for yourself that meets three tests:

    1. you’re passionate about it and you love to do it;
    2. you’re genetically encoded for it, so that when you do it you just feel like you were born to do it;
    3. and finally, you’re able to make the economics in your life work—you get well paid for it or perhaps there’s some other way of funding it with an economic engine.

    It’s a nice framework to guide and remind you to focus on what you naturally do well, enjoy and can make work for your own situation.

    Below is an expert from Jim Collins’s website;

    Now, people often struggle with the question, how do I find my own Hedgehog Concept? How do I find the intersection of my three circles? Let me suggest a specific piece of homework that everybody can do. That specific piece of homework is to take three totally separate sheets of paper.

    Sheet #1 On the first sheet of paper, do an analysis of yourself along the lines of, what am I truly passionate about? What do I love to do? What are the things that, even if there’s drudgery in them, I really have passion for doing them, and I have passion for the work?

    Sheet #2 covers the question, what am I genetically encoded for? What are those things that, when I do them, I feel as if I was made to do this? This just fits the way I’m constructed. It fits my psychology. It fits my capabilities. It fits what maybe I was even put here on this earth to do.

    Sheet #3 Finally, with the third sheet of paper, note all the various things you can think of that would allow you to have an economic engine. What are the things you could do in which you could make a living, if you need to do that? Or maybe the answer to that question is, “I don’t really need a traditional economic engine,” but what does your economic-engine sheet have as all the possibilities on it?

    Don’t worry about how those three circles or those three sheets of paper intersect with each other while you’re doing each one. Do them independently. Then give copies of those three sheets to your personal board of directors, or to other people whom you admire and whom you feel can provide perspective to you, and ask them for their thoughts regarding where they see the intersections. What do they think is the right direction for you? Have fun with it.

    Adapted from Jim Collins source; www.jimcollins.com 2019

  • Thoughts on explaining complexity vs. the complicated

    Thoughts on explaining complexity vs. the complicated

    Simple problem

    Baking a cake. To be successful you need a recipe and a belief that the recipe is tried, tested and accurate. No particular expertise is required, however cooking experience probably increases success rate. It’s important that you follow the recipe precisely as it has been tested many times before. If you do so the results are you will end up with a cake.

    Complicated problem

    Sending a rocket to the moon involves multiple recipes, formulae and procedures that are specified and must be followed in an exact order. If you follow procedures, over time there is an increased predictability of success. Each rocket increases the likelihood of the next being just as successful, because there are fewer and fewer variables and less unpredictable events.

    Complex problem

    Raising a child…. a possibility that emerges into something wholly unpredictable. Believe me, I speak from personal experience…

    Raising a child is less predictable, and raising two or more even more so. Following rigid protocols in child rearing may have limited application and may also be counterproductive. Why? Because every child is unique and must be understood as an individual. The environment that they grow up in will be different from the other children (e.g. birth order and environment at school/mix of friends/different teachers/different hobbies…).

    Raising one child provides experience, but provides no guarantees the same approach will work with the next child. As a parent you remain uncertain of the outcome throughout the process because you can’t separate the parts from the whole, the child from its environment. The essence of raising a child may have some ingredients of systems, structures and protocols, but it’s the relationship between people, experiences and moments in time…what this means is the future is unpredictable.

    Complicated & Complex Systems adapted from Tanser 2018 & Zimmerman 1999

    Multiply up the variables to the scale of an organisation, try to codify and control everything that goes on, and your supercomputer brain will start to fail. 

    How would you define your organisation? Simple, complicated or complex? How are you navigating your through your situation? Often the most complex systems utilise the simplest of rules to navigate through complexity.