Jan 2006
Parallels between a 15th century Chinese Admiral
& Hu Jintao
Previous readers of this blog will remember that i
mentioned the trips of Zheng He who travelled to the
shores of Africa and most of Asia mostly in search
new alliances and trading routes to bring resources
to the Chinese empire
In my study of history, most conflicts have been over the control of and need for resources. If you look at most conflicts most campaigns aim for the control of strategic resources,
I remembered an article in the Economist last year which looked at the travels of the Chinese Leader and published a map which I attach
As we can see from the map the Chinese President has travelled far and wide, often in the pursuit of strategic partnerships with commodity-rich potential suppliers for China's industrial enterprises
To that end he has toured Latin America, Africa, Australia, Canada and Central Asia.
It is especially interesting to note that to some of the resource rich but debt strapped countries these have been accompanied by offers to clear existing debts.
We mentioned the 'great sucking sound' in the earlier blog and maybe that is the hoovering of secure resources to keep the Chinese economy from slowing down.
If we look at the oil market last year there was a major play by China and India for oil assets abroad As their governments became more and more concerned about the need for energy security Asian energy firms snapped up oil and gas everywhere from Ecuador to Canada to Kazakhstan.
A Chinese company made a spectacular (although ultimately unsuccessful) $18.5 billion bid for America's Unocal. however not daunted the same company has just announced a successful $2.25 billion deal for oil and gas assets in Nigeria.
It is also rumoured that the same Chinese firm is now looking to purchase, a Canadian oil firm with assets in Central Asia, for a further $2 billion.
It was interesting to note that the first overseas trip of the new king of Saudi Arabia this month was to China and not to their traditional oldest ally the US .
In 1989 I read a book by the historian Paul Kennedy called
The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500-2000
It was one of my favourites and though a little dated it's premise was that most empires collapse when it as at its most hegemonic.
Empires also tend to collapse for other reasons:
A) when the costs of maintaining a defence capability become too much for the economy to bear.
B) They lose the ability to project power anywhere in the globe to be able to maintain access to the resources to keep it's economy going.
C) They also tended to become more isolated and introspective and become more concerned to maintain the status quo rather than having to compete and adapt to meet the changing world around them.
Zheng He in 1436 was barred by imperial edict from constructing seagoing ships by the Ming Emperor as that empire began its slow collapse when it turned its back on the world. It lost access to new ideas and potential new markets and limited its trade routes to mostly internal markets.
Do we learn the lessons of history?
In my study of history, most conflicts have been over the control of and need for resources. If you look at most conflicts most campaigns aim for the control of strategic resources,
I remembered an article in the Economist last year which looked at the travels of the Chinese Leader and published a map which I attach
As we can see from the map the Chinese President has travelled far and wide, often in the pursuit of strategic partnerships with commodity-rich potential suppliers for China's industrial enterprises
To that end he has toured Latin America, Africa, Australia, Canada and Central Asia.
It is especially interesting to note that to some of the resource rich but debt strapped countries these have been accompanied by offers to clear existing debts.
We mentioned the 'great sucking sound' in the earlier blog and maybe that is the hoovering of secure resources to keep the Chinese economy from slowing down.
If we look at the oil market last year there was a major play by China and India for oil assets abroad As their governments became more and more concerned about the need for energy security Asian energy firms snapped up oil and gas everywhere from Ecuador to Canada to Kazakhstan.
A Chinese company made a spectacular (although ultimately unsuccessful) $18.5 billion bid for America's Unocal. however not daunted the same company has just announced a successful $2.25 billion deal for oil and gas assets in Nigeria.
It is also rumoured that the same Chinese firm is now looking to purchase, a Canadian oil firm with assets in Central Asia, for a further $2 billion.
It was interesting to note that the first overseas trip of the new king of Saudi Arabia this month was to China and not to their traditional oldest ally the US .
In 1989 I read a book by the historian Paul Kennedy called
The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500-2000
It was one of my favourites and though a little dated it's premise was that most empires collapse when it as at its most hegemonic.
Empires also tend to collapse for other reasons:
A) when the costs of maintaining a defence capability become too much for the economy to bear.
B) They lose the ability to project power anywhere in the globe to be able to maintain access to the resources to keep it's economy going.
C) They also tended to become more isolated and introspective and become more concerned to maintain the status quo rather than having to compete and adapt to meet the changing world around them.
Zheng He in 1436 was barred by imperial edict from constructing seagoing ships by the Ming Emperor as that empire began its slow collapse when it turned its back on the world. It lost access to new ideas and potential new markets and limited its trade routes to mostly internal markets.
Do we learn the lessons of history?
|
BRIC's New Markets & Ozymandias
The 21st century will be a different place and
different shape geopolitically than it was as the
slow decline of the 1945 settlement takes place.
There will be new alignments which will be
uncomfortable to us in the western world especially
in the sclerotic European social economic market.
I was walking in Sainsbury's yesterday and saw a cheap very simple DVD player for £25.00. If we as consumers want a DVD player that cheap then there are consequences as there is little chance that it could be built in the UK without making a loss. I understand, that it is the lower costs of Chinese production that is keeping prices down and with it inflation.
However, there are opportunities for us in the UK as we do tend to be more open minded about keeping our borders open and are better than most at assimilating. I think that it is by being open that we will survive, but it is important that we educate our children that education doesn't stop at 16, it really is something that you have to do every few years or so in order to ride the surf waves of economic change
If we don't, then in 20 to 30 years will the UK be nothing more than a giant theme park for visitors from Asia to visit to see our heritage sites and will we be a living testament to one of Shelley's best poems about Ozymandias which if we do not adapt could be an epitaph not a sonnet.
I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said:—Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
Half sunk, a shatter'd visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamp'd on these lifeless things,
The hand that mock'd them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains: round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
The rise of the BRIC's was commented on by Jim Neill at Goldman Sachs but I do remember reading an article by CK Prahalad who highlighted the rise of the new market opportunities to the (to our concept) poor and rising middle class of the BRIC's. (I will re read the article and post a blog in due course) They will want the services that we want such as cars and demand and this opens the opportunity to a market in the BRIC's of about 2.7 bn people
The competition is going to be relentless because the BRIC's are just the fore runner as other poor countries say in Africa see the success of these 4 countries an copy their examples to grab a share of the global economic pie.
Ross Perot in the 1992 US election continually fulminated about NAFTA and said the great sucking sound you are hearing is your job going to Mexico. If he was campaigning today would he substitute a BRIC for Mexico.
The next bit of this blog will be about BRIC's and the lessons of History.
I was walking in Sainsbury's yesterday and saw a cheap very simple DVD player for £25.00. If we as consumers want a DVD player that cheap then there are consequences as there is little chance that it could be built in the UK without making a loss. I understand, that it is the lower costs of Chinese production that is keeping prices down and with it inflation.
However, there are opportunities for us in the UK as we do tend to be more open minded about keeping our borders open and are better than most at assimilating. I think that it is by being open that we will survive, but it is important that we educate our children that education doesn't stop at 16, it really is something that you have to do every few years or so in order to ride the surf waves of economic change
If we don't, then in 20 to 30 years will the UK be nothing more than a giant theme park for visitors from Asia to visit to see our heritage sites and will we be a living testament to one of Shelley's best poems about Ozymandias which if we do not adapt could be an epitaph not a sonnet.
I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said:—Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
Half sunk, a shatter'd visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamp'd on these lifeless things,
The hand that mock'd them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains: round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
The rise of the BRIC's was commented on by Jim Neill at Goldman Sachs but I do remember reading an article by CK Prahalad who highlighted the rise of the new market opportunities to the (to our concept) poor and rising middle class of the BRIC's. (I will re read the article and post a blog in due course) They will want the services that we want such as cars and demand and this opens the opportunity to a market in the BRIC's of about 2.7 bn people
The competition is going to be relentless because the BRIC's are just the fore runner as other poor countries say in Africa see the success of these 4 countries an copy their examples to grab a share of the global economic pie.
Ross Perot in the 1992 US election continually fulminated about NAFTA and said the great sucking sound you are hearing is your job going to Mexico. If he was campaigning today would he substitute a BRIC for Mexico.
The next bit of this blog will be about BRIC's and the lessons of History.
Hot update from China
In this Morning's Times newspaper 26/01/06
My own personal comment on this is that I can remember when studying economic geography in the 70's India and china were viewed as economic basket cases and seemed trapped behind inflexible command and control economies where the bureaucrat in Beijing/New Delhi knew best showed promise but no delivery.
Now by taking on board more liberal free market principles they are now feted as economic success stories and show that even the biggest economies can be turned round and you don't have to be a tiny nimble tiger economy to help increase your countries standard of living.
Here is the article
CHINA’S economy expanded 9.9 per cent last year, overtaking Britain and France to become the world’s fourth largest, while income per head for China’s 1.3 billion people increased to £120 a year to make its inhabitants richer than those of Morocco.
What is not in doubt is that China will sweep well ahead of Britain during 2006 and it is only a matter of a few years before third-placed Germany is surpassed.
Last year’s strong expansion followed growth of 10.1 per cent in 2004 and 10 per cent in 2003. Government measures to cool the economy such as credit curbs, tougher planning laws and a currency revaluation have made little impression.
Stephen Green, an economist with Standard Chartered Bank in Shanghai, said: “All these things should slow the economy down. But as a supertanker, it’s got so much momentum behind it.”
Investment covering everything from apartments to art centres contributed a whopping 48.8 per cent of 2005 growth. Consumption, which the government is trying to stimulate, accounted for 33.3 per cent of the increase in GDP while trade made up 17.9 per cent.
Statistics bureau chief Li Deshui said action was needed to brake investment and avert the risks of overcapacity, which could lead to a fresh crop of bad loans, wasted resources, bankruptcies and rising unemployment. However, barring policy mishaps, China’s prospects were bright.
Given its population and the Communist Party’s ambition to transform China into an economic superpower, many analysts anticipate it will one day become the world’s top economy. The US in 2004 had the world’s biggest economy at $11.7 trillion, followed by Japan at $4.9 trillion according to figures from the International Monetary Fund.
My own personal comment on this is that I can remember when studying economic geography in the 70's India and china were viewed as economic basket cases and seemed trapped behind inflexible command and control economies where the bureaucrat in Beijing/New Delhi knew best showed promise but no delivery.
Now by taking on board more liberal free market principles they are now feted as economic success stories and show that even the biggest economies can be turned round and you don't have to be a tiny nimble tiger economy to help increase your countries standard of living.
Here is the article
CHINA’S economy expanded 9.9 per cent last year, overtaking Britain and France to become the world’s fourth largest, while income per head for China’s 1.3 billion people increased to £120 a year to make its inhabitants richer than those of Morocco.
What is not in doubt is that China will sweep well ahead of Britain during 2006 and it is only a matter of a few years before third-placed Germany is surpassed.
Last year’s strong expansion followed growth of 10.1 per cent in 2004 and 10 per cent in 2003. Government measures to cool the economy such as credit curbs, tougher planning laws and a currency revaluation have made little impression.
Stephen Green, an economist with Standard Chartered Bank in Shanghai, said: “All these things should slow the economy down. But as a supertanker, it’s got so much momentum behind it.”
Investment covering everything from apartments to art centres contributed a whopping 48.8 per cent of 2005 growth. Consumption, which the government is trying to stimulate, accounted for 33.3 per cent of the increase in GDP while trade made up 17.9 per cent.
Statistics bureau chief Li Deshui said action was needed to brake investment and avert the risks of overcapacity, which could lead to a fresh crop of bad loans, wasted resources, bankruptcies and rising unemployment. However, barring policy mishaps, China’s prospects were bright.
Given its population and the Communist Party’s ambition to transform China into an economic superpower, many analysts anticipate it will one day become the world’s top economy. The US in 2004 had the world’s biggest economy at $11.7 trillion, followed by Japan at $4.9 trillion according to figures from the International Monetary Fund.
The Fish and the rise of the BRICS
Over the next few issues, I'm going to start to look
at the issues of BRICs which is an issue that a
number of commentators have started to look at.
Over the next 50 years, Brazil, Russia, India and China-the BRICs economies-could become a much larger force in the world economy.
Subject to the usual caveats. If things go right, in less than 40 years, the BRICs economies together could be larger than the G6 in US dollar terms. By 2025 they could account for over half the size of the G6.
Of the current G6, only the US and Japan may be among the six largest economies in US dollar terms in 2050. it is predicted that at the end of 2006, China will put the British economy into 5th position and the G 8 is likely to expand to at least the G12.
The list of the world's ten largest economies may look quite different in 2050. The largest economies in the world (by GDP) may no longer be the richest (by income per capita), making strategic choices for firms more complex as well as having a major geopolitical implications.
If we look at the picture at the bottom, emerging economies produced slightly more than half of the worlds GDP. Also the 32 largest emerging economies grew over the last two years. It is interesting to note that the world economy is strengthening as more and more countries adopt a more open and market friendly economic systems. The emerging countries real incomes also are growing.
The US and Britain doubles their real incomes over a 50 year period whereas China has achieved this in 10 years.
I suppose that there are advantages by being an early adopter of technology than always being a leader. The interesting thing being a historian is the examination of trends and that China and India have been economic powers in the past but fell into a deep conservatism.
If you go to Wikipedia and look up the travels of Zheng He in the 15th century, you would wonder why the Chinese Empire did not follow up it's advantage in science and travel to become a leading economic power.
I was listening to a meeting of some manufacturers recently and listened to their fear based on the belief that emerging countries will steal emerged countries output.
However if countries are exporting and achieving good economic growth, then it will give these countries the opportunity to import those services and goods that the local market cannot supply. A major problem is that low skilled workers who relied on very little educational qualifications will lose out relative to skilled and workers (and organisations) who are flexible.
That is why the European economies can't afford to be laggards over reform or leave their work force both now and in the future ill equipped to meet the challenges of today and tomorrow.
We will need to make hard decisions and move away from sunset industries and move towards either niche areas where a premium price can be achieved either in manufacturing industries or in service industries which will be able to tap in to the new economic areas increasing wealth and demand for up market products.
If i learnt one thing from my thesis on knowledge sharing it was that this is an area where retaining knowledge will be the major source of sustainable competitive advantage for organisations.
Over the next 50 years, Brazil, Russia, India and China-the BRICs economies-could become a much larger force in the world economy.
Subject to the usual caveats. If things go right, in less than 40 years, the BRICs economies together could be larger than the G6 in US dollar terms. By 2025 they could account for over half the size of the G6.
Of the current G6, only the US and Japan may be among the six largest economies in US dollar terms in 2050. it is predicted that at the end of 2006, China will put the British economy into 5th position and the G 8 is likely to expand to at least the G12.
The list of the world's ten largest economies may look quite different in 2050. The largest economies in the world (by GDP) may no longer be the richest (by income per capita), making strategic choices for firms more complex as well as having a major geopolitical implications.
If we look at the picture at the bottom, emerging economies produced slightly more than half of the worlds GDP. Also the 32 largest emerging economies grew over the last two years. It is interesting to note that the world economy is strengthening as more and more countries adopt a more open and market friendly economic systems. The emerging countries real incomes also are growing.
The US and Britain doubles their real incomes over a 50 year period whereas China has achieved this in 10 years.
I suppose that there are advantages by being an early adopter of technology than always being a leader. The interesting thing being a historian is the examination of trends and that China and India have been economic powers in the past but fell into a deep conservatism.
If you go to Wikipedia and look up the travels of Zheng He in the 15th century, you would wonder why the Chinese Empire did not follow up it's advantage in science and travel to become a leading economic power.
I was listening to a meeting of some manufacturers recently and listened to their fear based on the belief that emerging countries will steal emerged countries output.
However if countries are exporting and achieving good economic growth, then it will give these countries the opportunity to import those services and goods that the local market cannot supply. A major problem is that low skilled workers who relied on very little educational qualifications will lose out relative to skilled and workers (and organisations) who are flexible.
That is why the European economies can't afford to be laggards over reform or leave their work force both now and in the future ill equipped to meet the challenges of today and tomorrow.
We will need to make hard decisions and move away from sunset industries and move towards either niche areas where a premium price can be achieved either in manufacturing industries or in service industries which will be able to tap in to the new economic areas increasing wealth and demand for up market products.
If i learnt one thing from my thesis on knowledge sharing it was that this is an area where retaining knowledge will be the major source of sustainable competitive advantage for organisations.
40 second Boyd and the OODA loop for decisions
When you are reading
this title, you will be wondering where this article
is going to. hopefully by the time you've finished
this - you will have another in your armoury for
decision making.
I when smaller enjoyed making models and one of the last I made was a F-16 fighter jet as it was designed as a throwback to old planes like the Spitfire. It isn't the quickest nor does it fly higher or go further than other fighter aircraft. It's ability is in the way it is more agile and can withstand 9 times G force.
John Boyd from the USAF helped in the design and championing of this type of aircraft to outmanoeuvre any competitive fighter jet of its type. Boyd was known as 40 second Boyd as he had a standing bet with any fighter pilot that even if he was at a disadvantage at the start of a simulated dogfight he would be in a winning position within 40 seconds. If not then he would cough up $40. He never lost.
It is the same with organisations in today's competitive are you a F 16 - highly agile and able to outmanoeuvre your competition or are you a the corporate equivalent of Hercules Transport plane where it takes you a long time to react.
Out of his experiences he came up with the OODA loop which stands for:-
Observe, Orient,Decide and Act.
He saw this as a means of gaining competitive advantage over another fighter. If you can pull a tighter turn than another fighter pilot then it gives you the advantage for if you are acting quickly and out thinking and outmanoeuvring an opponent tends to generate confusion and disorder for that opponent. If you don't believe it just watch "Top Gun' for classic OODA tactics.
Where the corporate world is becoming more and more complex and we work in environments were the rules of the game seem to constantly change and time horizons alter, then perhaps we need to look at OODA loops.
What i am interested in is how leaders within the organisation can corrupt an OODA loop working within their organisation because they fear that they cannot handle in terms of complexity the constancy of OODA loops that keep running all the time.
A recent comment in another blog called Zen Pundit highlights how this occurs.
He highlights that Leaders play a critical role in the operation the OODA loop both for the decision-makers and the remainder of the organisation.
Leaders, so long as they retain the initiative, usually have the framing advantage on areas under under discussion, thereby determining the parameters of debate. this can be as I have learnt because of their status either through their position in the organisation or through their technical expertise.
Framing not only influences the " orientation" part of the OODA loop where information is integrated into the worldview but it can also effect "observation" as well. These definitions can then affect the way that perceptions are driven thus creating self-fulfilling prophecies and blind spots.
Leaders can do a number of things to corrupt the OODA loop:
1. React to uncertainty by attempting to impose ever higher degrees of control over a complex system.
2. Accept only the data as valid that agrees with their own mental maps of the world when making systemic decisions.
3. Deliberately attempt to isolate themselves from feedback or undertake " kill the messenger" policies.
If these informational dysfunctions occur then you can get just as confused as your potential opponent.
If you would like to find out more about OODA loops as part of my training on decision making, then please contact me.
I when smaller enjoyed making models and one of the last I made was a F-16 fighter jet as it was designed as a throwback to old planes like the Spitfire. It isn't the quickest nor does it fly higher or go further than other fighter aircraft. It's ability is in the way it is more agile and can withstand 9 times G force.
John Boyd from the USAF helped in the design and championing of this type of aircraft to outmanoeuvre any competitive fighter jet of its type. Boyd was known as 40 second Boyd as he had a standing bet with any fighter pilot that even if he was at a disadvantage at the start of a simulated dogfight he would be in a winning position within 40 seconds. If not then he would cough up $40. He never lost.
It is the same with organisations in today's competitive are you a F 16 - highly agile and able to outmanoeuvre your competition or are you a the corporate equivalent of Hercules Transport plane where it takes you a long time to react.
Out of his experiences he came up with the OODA loop which stands for:-
Observe, Orient,Decide and Act.
He saw this as a means of gaining competitive advantage over another fighter. If you can pull a tighter turn than another fighter pilot then it gives you the advantage for if you are acting quickly and out thinking and outmanoeuvring an opponent tends to generate confusion and disorder for that opponent. If you don't believe it just watch "Top Gun' for classic OODA tactics.
Where the corporate world is becoming more and more complex and we work in environments were the rules of the game seem to constantly change and time horizons alter, then perhaps we need to look at OODA loops.
What i am interested in is how leaders within the organisation can corrupt an OODA loop working within their organisation because they fear that they cannot handle in terms of complexity the constancy of OODA loops that keep running all the time.
A recent comment in another blog called Zen Pundit highlights how this occurs.
He highlights that Leaders play a critical role in the operation the OODA loop both for the decision-makers and the remainder of the organisation.
Leaders, so long as they retain the initiative, usually have the framing advantage on areas under under discussion, thereby determining the parameters of debate. this can be as I have learnt because of their status either through their position in the organisation or through their technical expertise.
Framing not only influences the " orientation" part of the OODA loop where information is integrated into the worldview but it can also effect "observation" as well. These definitions can then affect the way that perceptions are driven thus creating self-fulfilling prophecies and blind spots.
Leaders can do a number of things to corrupt the OODA loop:
1. React to uncertainty by attempting to impose ever higher degrees of control over a complex system.
2. Accept only the data as valid that agrees with their own mental maps of the world when making systemic decisions.
3. Deliberately attempt to isolate themselves from feedback or undertake " kill the messenger" policies.
If these informational dysfunctions occur then you can get just as confused as your potential opponent.
If you would like to find out more about OODA loops as part of my training on decision making, then please contact me.
Do we need St George in Management?
19/01/2006 13:49 Knowledge Management Knowledge
ManagementKnowledge Management Permalink
In the two
previous blogs we've been examining the question of
how research has been showing that the best leaders
tend to be humble and disdain the limelight if they
can. the final section looks at how leaders who are
quiet tend to have four rules in handling the ethical
challenges as well as making decisions. In this i've
been taken by the work of Joseph Badaracco in an
article in Harvard Business Review in 2001 which
looks at this area.
The four rules are as follows:
Put things off until tomorrow
When an ethical dilemma escalates, buy time. How many times have we as managers regretted precipitate action or been glad we reflected on a decision overnight when the heat of battle is not so hot. Sometimes the issues need to be mulled over for a bit This buffer zone allows the quiet voice to come through and this can be done through 'strategic stalling" by dotting all the i's and crossing all the t's to gain that time.
Pick your battles
in organisations - this capital is the £'s and pence of organisational life that we like squirrels accumulate by getting a reputation for say getting things achieved or by having a good network or just a good sharer of knowledge. As one who has worked in organisations for 25 years - it is hard to gain and quick to lose.
Like any investor a quiet leader invests it astutely and uses it with caution. Before taking a stand on an issue or dealing with a tough problem - a quiet leader undertakes a risk/reward analysis of making a stand. I've had to do this a couple of times in my career and i imagine you as readers can recognise the scenario.
Bend the rules - don't break them
If we follow the rules in a bovine manner, this can be used as a cop-out to avoid making a decision. I think everyone of us has told a 'white lie' to help somebody save face. A quiet leader finds ways to manoeuvre within the boundaries.
Find a compromise
I've been fortunate to work in a variety of organisations and one wise banker taught me a lesson. If you stand your ground too rigidly even though you may be right in every way - you will snap like a tree in a high wind one day.
Life is full of compromises and although it smacks of smoke filled rooms and that you are trimming to match the winds. As that famous politician of the 17th century the Marquis of Halifax was fond of saying that if people are leaning too far over in a boat and it is about to capsize into the water then he thought it well that a trimmer was needed to protect the boat
The four rules are as follows:
Put things off until tomorrow
When an ethical dilemma escalates, buy time. How many times have we as managers regretted precipitate action or been glad we reflected on a decision overnight when the heat of battle is not so hot. Sometimes the issues need to be mulled over for a bit This buffer zone allows the quiet voice to come through and this can be done through 'strategic stalling" by dotting all the i's and crossing all the t's to gain that time.
Pick your battles
in organisations - this capital is the £'s and pence of organisational life that we like squirrels accumulate by getting a reputation for say getting things achieved or by having a good network or just a good sharer of knowledge. As one who has worked in organisations for 25 years - it is hard to gain and quick to lose.
Like any investor a quiet leader invests it astutely and uses it with caution. Before taking a stand on an issue or dealing with a tough problem - a quiet leader undertakes a risk/reward analysis of making a stand. I've had to do this a couple of times in my career and i imagine you as readers can recognise the scenario.
Bend the rules - don't break them
If we follow the rules in a bovine manner, this can be used as a cop-out to avoid making a decision. I think everyone of us has told a 'white lie' to help somebody save face. A quiet leader finds ways to manoeuvre within the boundaries.
Find a compromise
I've been fortunate to work in a variety of organisations and one wise banker taught me a lesson. If you stand your ground too rigidly even though you may be right in every way - you will snap like a tree in a high wind one day.
Life is full of compromises and although it smacks of smoke filled rooms and that you are trimming to match the winds. As that famous politician of the 17th century the Marquis of Halifax was fond of saying that if people are leaning too far over in a boat and it is about to capsize into the water then he thought it well that a trimmer was needed to protect the boat
Radical change - the quiet way
i talked
in my last blog about stealth leadership and that in
the next blog - i would return to the subject in
terms of quiet leadership. last time I looked at the
work that the very well known Jim Collins has written
about.
The next writer on this subject is Debra Meyerson who to adjust Teddy Roosevelt's famous saying says "Lead Softly and carry a big impact" She looks at organisations who are going through cultural changes - always the most difficult and getting round the question - how is this push not going to damage my career.
Meyerson outlines some techniques but effectively it boils down to the saying above. Become what she calls a tempered radical as these people lead significant changes and reduce resistance by staying below the corporate radar screen.
So what is a tempered radical - they tend to be informal leaders who very quietly challenge the status quo and thus become the change they want to see in the organisation.
They use some subtle techniques which includes 'disruptive self-expression where they undertake behaviour or actions that support change. this can be through your language, dress and behaviours. People in the organisation do talk and a bit like meeting a nice girl at the dance - once one brave soul has crossed to the other side of the room others will follow. Verbal ju jitsu where radicals possess not only self-control but also emotional intelligence to assess the situation around them to redirect negative statements or actions by people into the means to deliver positive change.
They can also be just opportunists. I was looking at ways of saving waste in an organisation and by just showing and providing people with a set of instructions about how to set their laser printers how to do double sided printing and reducing font size by one point started to save the organisation money and by introducing that in one office and disseminating it through the organisation meant that paper waste was reduced. If you add up the little things that people in your organisation can do - sooner or later you get real change.
Finally - radicals look to work with allies who are of like mind and then look for opponents and rather than making them enemies - and being defensive - because they can be the best area for support and resources. I have to say that for myself this can be best done if you can show people the value that it will give them as well as the organisation.
The next article in this series will be in dealing with ethical challenges. I've tackled this as i heard an interesting talk last night (11th January) by Harjit Sekhon at Coventry University talking about his work on trust.
I think that companies failures to deal with ethical issues is one of the reasons that trust levels in the public perceptions of companies is why legislation like Sarbanes-Oxley has come in as well as a sense of unease in the the CEO as emperor that I mentioned in my earlier blog. I suppose this comes back every century or so as it did at the start of the 20th century with the Robber Barons. Microsoft and Wal-Mart are only the inheritors of Standard Oil in terms of public hostility.
The next writer on this subject is Debra Meyerson who to adjust Teddy Roosevelt's famous saying says "Lead Softly and carry a big impact" She looks at organisations who are going through cultural changes - always the most difficult and getting round the question - how is this push not going to damage my career.
Meyerson outlines some techniques but effectively it boils down to the saying above. Become what she calls a tempered radical as these people lead significant changes and reduce resistance by staying below the corporate radar screen.
So what is a tempered radical - they tend to be informal leaders who very quietly challenge the status quo and thus become the change they want to see in the organisation.
They use some subtle techniques which includes 'disruptive self-expression where they undertake behaviour or actions that support change. this can be through your language, dress and behaviours. People in the organisation do talk and a bit like meeting a nice girl at the dance - once one brave soul has crossed to the other side of the room others will follow. Verbal ju jitsu where radicals possess not only self-control but also emotional intelligence to assess the situation around them to redirect negative statements or actions by people into the means to deliver positive change.
They can also be just opportunists. I was looking at ways of saving waste in an organisation and by just showing and providing people with a set of instructions about how to set their laser printers how to do double sided printing and reducing font size by one point started to save the organisation money and by introducing that in one office and disseminating it through the organisation meant that paper waste was reduced. If you add up the little things that people in your organisation can do - sooner or later you get real change.
Finally - radicals look to work with allies who are of like mind and then look for opponents and rather than making them enemies - and being defensive - because they can be the best area for support and resources. I have to say that for myself this can be best done if you can show people the value that it will give them as well as the organisation.
The next article in this series will be in dealing with ethical challenges. I've tackled this as i heard an interesting talk last night (11th January) by Harjit Sekhon at Coventry University talking about his work on trust.
I think that companies failures to deal with ethical issues is one of the reasons that trust levels in the public perceptions of companies is why legislation like Sarbanes-Oxley has come in as well as a sense of unease in the the CEO as emperor that I mentioned in my earlier blog. I suppose this comes back every century or so as it did at the start of the 20th century with the Robber Barons. Microsoft and Wal-Mart are only the inheritors of Standard Oil in terms of public hostility.
Metternich and the concept of quiet leadership
When i
started work back in September 1980, it was
emphasised to me that the manager was the fount of
all knowledge when it came to running the office. he
was the leader he was the protector of the office
from the dangers of a changing world - or at least it
seemed that way to a very naive 18 year old at the
time.
However one day I was re reading an article from an old history essay on Prince Metternich who was the diplomatic genius from 1815 to 1848 dominated European politics during this period. He acted as the restorer of the 'Old Regime' and the reconstruction of Europe after the Napoleonic wars. To safeguard the balance of power Metternich formed a 'Holy Alliance' between the monarchies of Austria, Russia, Prussia and France.
He was not in any official power yet dominated the emperors of his period and led Europe. One of the motivations was an abhorrence of the chaos that Europe's rulers felt that the French Revolution and the Napoleonic era had caused.
I was thinking about when reading an article recently about leadership. We do seem to be moving away from the model of the CEO as a charismatic and omnipotent leader on our magazine covers. I have noticed especially in management magazines from the USA highlighting the rise of 'stealth leadership' in top performing US companies rather than the Jack Welch/Ken Lay/Bernie Ebbers high profile CEO's.
One of the leading writers on this form of quiet Leadership is Jim Collins who wrote 'From Good to Great' Collins calls this type of leadership Level 5 leadership and highlights the paradox of managers with deep personal humility - who 'look out of the window rather than the mirror to apportion credit . What this means is that they take responsibility by looking in the mirror never citing bad luck or external factors when things go wrong.
Conversely, when things go right they look to give undue credit to another person or to factors outside of themselves. These leaders suppress their egos and disdain the lime light whilst using their 'Clark Kent' mild mannered but steely style to produce extraordinary but consistent results. This approach and setting these inspired standards rather than inspiring charisma to motivate.
I will come back to this area of stealth leadership again in my next blog and introduce readers to the concept of tempered radicals.
Watch this space in a couple of days time
However one day I was re reading an article from an old history essay on Prince Metternich who was the diplomatic genius from 1815 to 1848 dominated European politics during this period. He acted as the restorer of the 'Old Regime' and the reconstruction of Europe after the Napoleonic wars. To safeguard the balance of power Metternich formed a 'Holy Alliance' between the monarchies of Austria, Russia, Prussia and France.
He was not in any official power yet dominated the emperors of his period and led Europe. One of the motivations was an abhorrence of the chaos that Europe's rulers felt that the French Revolution and the Napoleonic era had caused.
I was thinking about when reading an article recently about leadership. We do seem to be moving away from the model of the CEO as a charismatic and omnipotent leader on our magazine covers. I have noticed especially in management magazines from the USA highlighting the rise of 'stealth leadership' in top performing US companies rather than the Jack Welch/Ken Lay/Bernie Ebbers high profile CEO's.
One of the leading writers on this form of quiet Leadership is Jim Collins who wrote 'From Good to Great' Collins calls this type of leadership Level 5 leadership and highlights the paradox of managers with deep personal humility - who 'look out of the window rather than the mirror to apportion credit . What this means is that they take responsibility by looking in the mirror never citing bad luck or external factors when things go wrong.
Conversely, when things go right they look to give undue credit to another person or to factors outside of themselves. These leaders suppress their egos and disdain the lime light whilst using their 'Clark Kent' mild mannered but steely style to produce extraordinary but consistent results. This approach and setting these inspired standards rather than inspiring charisma to motivate.
I will come back to this area of stealth leadership again in my next blog and introduce readers to the concept of tempered radicals.
Watch this space in a couple of days time
Ideas that last beyond 2006
I've
recently been reading an article in Strategy &
Business where they surveyed their readers on the
ideas that they thought would last
The one concept that took nearly half of the votes was Execution.
It isn't just the fact that strategic choices are made by organisations it is their ability to implement them effectively. this doesn't mean just concentrating on the key indicators in your organisation it is as I learnt at Dunlop tyres and in Barclays many years ago finding the small ways to improve, implementing the improvements, monitoring how they bed down and then repeat the process.
We have over the last 25 years of my working life made massive changes in the way that we work and we have made tremendous improvements in organisational productivity, effectiveness and attentiveness to opportunities. organisations have found as i alluded to in my 'Big Beasts" article in December is to change both people and the organisational culture of their firms.
So many firms are wearied by the struggle that like a mammoth in the tar pits they find it occasionally easier to let matters slip.
As the law of diminishing returns applies so we in organisations are in danger of chasing management fads or hopefully the organisational equivalent of the silver bullet.
So if we concentrate on making it real and having the mental and organisational flexibility to bring new and relevant business models to meet the demands of the times even if it appears somewhat contrarian - then that I think is the key ability to running a company now and use the great organisational tools that we possess in our armoury.
The second idea that will be of interest to the professional services firm is that of the learning organisation.
Even the most bovine of managers has recognised the truth of the saying that I lead with on my front page of this web site. Sustainable competitive advantage only can be achieved now by developing the learning skills of the people within their organisation and providing them with the organisational structures and means to collaborate.
It means not only sharing knowledge and skills but in everyone up and down the organisational structure to be dedicated to continuos improvement and to accept that junior colleagues can help senior colleagues to handle data redundancy.
Organisations that provide this framework are the ones that will reap the benefits of the future.
The one concept that took nearly half of the votes was Execution.
It isn't just the fact that strategic choices are made by organisations it is their ability to implement them effectively. this doesn't mean just concentrating on the key indicators in your organisation it is as I learnt at Dunlop tyres and in Barclays many years ago finding the small ways to improve, implementing the improvements, monitoring how they bed down and then repeat the process.
We have over the last 25 years of my working life made massive changes in the way that we work and we have made tremendous improvements in organisational productivity, effectiveness and attentiveness to opportunities. organisations have found as i alluded to in my 'Big Beasts" article in December is to change both people and the organisational culture of their firms.
So many firms are wearied by the struggle that like a mammoth in the tar pits they find it occasionally easier to let matters slip.
As the law of diminishing returns applies so we in organisations are in danger of chasing management fads or hopefully the organisational equivalent of the silver bullet.
So if we concentrate on making it real and having the mental and organisational flexibility to bring new and relevant business models to meet the demands of the times even if it appears somewhat contrarian - then that I think is the key ability to running a company now and use the great organisational tools that we possess in our armoury.
The second idea that will be of interest to the professional services firm is that of the learning organisation.
Even the most bovine of managers has recognised the truth of the saying that I lead with on my front page of this web site. Sustainable competitive advantage only can be achieved now by developing the learning skills of the people within their organisation and providing them with the organisational structures and means to collaborate.
It means not only sharing knowledge and skills but in everyone up and down the organisational structure to be dedicated to continuos improvement and to accept that junior colleagues can help senior colleagues to handle data redundancy.
Organisations that provide this framework are the ones that will reap the benefits of the future.