ADVISA

We had our worst year in our 23-year history in 2009.  We were down 18%.  It may surprise you, but we felt pretty good about that.  It seems we outperformed most of our peers and we’ve prepared ourselves to blossom when the economic spring arrives.

Our organizational planning process allowed us to survive the long economic winter reasonably well – we both made a little money and used the downturn and our recruiting strategy to add two very talented people to our team (Dana Harrison and BJ McKay).  Going into this year, our strategic planning approach was to work hard and hope for a flat year – likely, plus or minus 7%. That was where we assumed the last of the winter would leave us.  If the winter ever left us.

Maybe the season is starting to change.  Last month, we performed very well on, what is for us, a key balanced scorecard metric – Net New Business (NNB).  Obviously not a GAAP approved measure.  NNB is simply the difference between the revenue we add and what is cancelled in our 90-day forecast.  In February, our number came close to the levels of the hot times prior to the deep economic cold spell that has engulfed most businesses recently.  We hadn’t seen that for a while.  And March is tracking similarly.

In watching our clients, we see some businesses that are continuing to struggle on what is, for them, a frozen landscape.  But, we also see businesses that are starting to bud – to push optimistically toward the sun.  They’re recognizing that it’s time to invest in those things that we can bring to them:  implementing organizational planning programs, improving their sales performance and instituting HR best practices.  Overall, they're wanting what we deliver:  the organizational confidence that yields sustainable results.

Like the daffodil buds bursting from the ground outside my office window, I think the economic spring may be here.  It’s been a long, cold winter; I’m ready to once again see and smell the flowers.  I’m excited.

I was recently engaged by a client to conduct some executive coaching to achieve better organizational alignment.  After receiving some 360 performance feedback, it became apparent that the autocratic management style of the chief executive was restricting the growth of the organization and its people. The inherent commanding leadership style was effective as long as the CEO was around and could monitor what was happening; but as the business grew and demands were placed upon him to be out of the office more, his presence, and hence his ability to control output, was continually challenged.  The future growth of the organization and its employee productivity was being restricted by his capacity to touch it.  The strategic planning process was done in his office and it was not a collabrative effort with his critical team members.

Power is one of those things we are granted by others temporarily.  Power associated with position or title is only perceptual power.  Real power is something you earn in your organization.  It cannot be assumed.  It is given for reasons other than authority, position, hierarchy or title.  It is only given for reasons like respect, admiration, quality of relationship, because others believe you, or you have their best interest as a priority, etc.  Additionally, power is held in all levels within the organization.  If someone in a lower position uses real power while you use positional power they can have a far greater impact on your staff than you do, despite or your hieacrhial advantage.

In the research for Crucial Confrontations the researchers discovered a proportional link between the types of power used and success or failure.  The more position power (authority) was used the less successful leaders were.

Since your authority resides within you, like you it leaves the room when you leave.  If you want your influence to remain after you leave, you have to rely on more than just authority.  People who possess true power never really need, and seldom do, tell others they have power.  Threats or ultimatums are simply not necessary to accomplish what they need to get done.  Does your power stick around after you leave the office?  Do things run as smoothly or efficiently when you're not there?  Are you hesitant to leave or not be involved because the wheels tend to come off when you unplug?  

Take a minute a download the leadership white paper from the link on the top left of the page or e-mail me at tgross@advisausa.com 

• Is the position's incumbent required to determine and drive change?
• Do you have a big book of rules and instructions for the job that contains all the information the incumbent needs?
• Do you want someone who simply follows your orders?
• Can you stand having someone tell you how to run your business?

• Provide opportunities for your superstars to leverage their success to teach teammates within the organization, or to a wider audience outside of the organization.  Think webinar series, or a similar vehicle of promotion of both your superstar and your company.

• Listen, listen, and listen some more to what your superstars have to say.  You may not always agree with the direction they see for the company, but their success is a testament that they care about what they're doing and are able to articulate why your company's products/services are top notch.  Every interaction should be a two way street.

• If your superstar is loose with the rules that others are held firmly to, be sure that they truly understand the value of the rules to successful business operations.  This too should be a two way conversation.  If the given rules do not have substance, it might be time to reevaluate which rules are the ones most deserving of enforcement.

• Use the success of your superstar as momentum for the entire organization, and let a wider group feel the high of success with them.  The superstar, in most cases, believes in the organization and is usually willing to be a springboard for the success of others

• With the Predictive Index® tool we are able to identify the source of self confidence for all those who take the survey, this is a giant leap ahead into understanding how to supervise people and foster an environment where confidence, motivation, productivity, and consistent results are the norm.  Evaluate P.I.® as your behavioral assessment instrument.  You'll be far better equipped with objective data on the talented people that drive your business.  

Several societal trends may make telecommuting the next great employee productivity boost. As highlighted in this NPR article, increased fuel costs, demands for improved work-life balance and technology advancements all support more people doing their work from their home. 

Where is the employee productivity boost in this? For the employee themself it comes from eliminating the time and cost of transporting yourself from your residence to your place of work. On any given day this probably adds at least an hour of discretionary time for most people. It is certainly something I value in my own “work from home environment.

The employers’ side of the equation includes reduced expenses for facilities to make room for the employee.  If nothing else, when done right, telecommuting provides greater work satisfaction and this will improve staff motivation.

Of course telecommuting won’t work in all situations and for all people. It takes a certain type of person to manage the independence inherent in telecommuting and personality assessments can help you determine if you or your people have that capability. If you’re looking for hierarchy and structure you won’t find it working from home. While the NPR article also mentions a need for personal interaction, I think this “need” will be increasingly fulfilled by interactive technology as time goes on and in fact it may be easier to connect with people via a network than face-to-face in a workplace.

Anybody who has every scrambled for a meeting room at the last minute can relate to that!

Nothing feels better than when we get to use our natural strengths to accomplish something.  Not only does that feel great, but it follows that our performance of the task, as well as our attitude before, during and after the task, would be great too.

Managers who understand this truth about people and performance are masterful at engaging their employees in getting desired business results.  In fact, that is the essence of management - engaging employees in work that furthers the mission of the larger organization.  The best managers understand the importance of motivation and they view their job as unlocking what makes each individual tick and trying to provide a work environment that meets people's needs.  The use of a reliable, valid personnel assessment can make this process more effective.  The reality is that we're not all wired the same and therefore, a one-size-fits-all management approach doesn't work.  Unfortunately, the importance of motivation and engaging employees gets lost in most "new manager training programs."
 
What new managers need are tools to help them understand the unique personality differences and motivating needs present in each of their employees and then strategies for linking each employee's job to larger organizational goals.  There are lots of hiring assessments and personnel assessments that claim to accurately measure personality characterstics.   A note of caution however:  any personnel assessment that is not used as part of a larger effort to improve and align human performance with business goals is a waste of time and money. 

If you're serious about creating an effective, healthy work environment where everything from recruiting to hiring to management training to employee development and organizational design is laser-focused on creating a workplace where people get to use their strengths, then contact ADVISA to learn more about the Predictive Index(r) system for increasing employee engagement and business results.  Our raison d'etre is helping organizations understand the importance of motivation and engaging employees and we provide proven tools, training and consulting support for leaders and managers at all levels. 

Or click here to download our Leadership Whitepaper.

 

• A phenomenal closer can be the weakest investigator, asking too few questions and moving for the first business they see in front of them
• A strong investigator, with purposeful questions for the prospect, can be abysmal at staying on track and continuing down a path that leads to a sale
• A strong opener and presenter can be too soft in asking for committment

• A small, well-trained and highly-motivated staff adds more value than a larger, less engaged staff; and, 
• A smaller staff, operating at a higher level of performance lends itself to a minimalist, i.e. more efficient, less expensive organization design.

This is an occasional series describing a real challenge faced by one of my clients (anonymously) and my recommendation to them based on analysis and understanding of personality assessments.

Scenario: A manufacturing company wants to utilize the Predictive Index® "PRO” system to define the behavioral characteristics of a key position to maximize employee productivity. The nature of the job is to be a change-agent driving innovation across the organization. The title for the job is “Innovation Leader” and is an individual contributor position with no direct reports.

The position was newly created in early 2007 and we developed a PRO for this position - a classic Authoritative reference pattern (Highest A, Lowest C, High B, Cutback D).

The Issue: In early 2010 we initiated a Turbo Hiring project to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of using PI® with this job and maximize organizational alignment. We reviewed the PRO to see if the experience of the past two years had changed anything. We also validated the PRO result by comparing the Top Performing incumbents vs. the Bottom Performing incumbents.

PI Analysis and Recommendation: The 2010 PRO was the same PI Reference Pattern (Authoritative) as in 2007. In addition, the Top Performers’ average PI was the same PI Reference Pattern and the Bottom Performers’ average PI was almost exactly the opposite – a Diligence pattern with Highest D, Lowest A, High C & Low B.

The consistency of the two PROs with the Top Performing incumbents provides a very high level of confidence that this is the appropriate PI target for this position. My recommendation was to apply this target with rigorous consistency. We prepared analytical screening tools and targeted behavioral questions and training for supervisors as part of the Turbo Hiring process to systematize application of these results.

Impact: With the increased clarity and confidence obtained through the Turbo Hiring process, my client began to consider career moves for the Bottom Performers to put them in jobs where work satisfaction was more likely. In addition, with the target clarified, they began to search for current employees with this PI pattern as an initial development step to groom them for the “Innovation Leader” position.

 

On Tuesday I led a webinar about using Predictive Index® (PI®) in the hiring process - everything from using it to help define the position, to marketing it, to screening candidates, to training the new hire.  As often happens, a key point in the discussion was about using Predictive Index in hiring selection to help decide whether a candidate moves forward in the process.  The question here is how much weight to give PI, or, for that matter, any of the multitude of hiring assessments that are on the market.

I've been giving this a lot of thought trying to figure out how best to meaningfully answer this question and realized that this goes back to the fact that neither PI nor any other factor in considering a candidate should be the one deciding factor. 

When we're hiring, we're looking for an assortment of knowledge, skills and abilities that must be present in order for someone to be successful.  Let's say you're hiring a mechanical engineer who needs at least 5 years of experience in manufacturing, ideally in metals manufacturing.  When you screen resumes, do you focus on just one of these items?  Do you decide that anyone with experience in metals manufacturing gets a phone interview?  Of course not!  You look at the total package that a candidate brings and you compare that against the entire package that you're seeking.  You're also exercising wisdom in considering what factors are flexible and which are not.  For example, a candidate with only 4 years of experience, but who comes from a competitor who demands a lot of their engineers might be a candidate you pursue. In this case, the years of experience is flexible in light of other factors.

Matching a candidate's PI profile (or other personality indicators) works the same way.  Such personality assessments should be used wisely as a factor in considering candidates.  Hyperfocusing on any one factor can lead to missing great candidates and unwisely pursuing others.  Ultimately, no one factor is most important - knowing what you need, what your dealbreakers are and how to exercise wisdom through the hiring process is. 

 

• Revenue generation
• Client retention
• Profit 
• Production
• Growth
• Momentum
• Sales
• Competitive advantage

• Turnover
• Customer attrition 
• Decline in profit
• Loss
• Poor reputation
• Skinny margins

A Thought to Improve the Succession Planning Process

The following comment was posted to my blog of last week titled, “Bob’s Hiring Strategy is no More” by my youngest son, Reid:

Knowing your personality and profile, I would think however voluntary the transfer of power is; it still would be difficult for you to outsource some of the decision-making and strategic planning process. It would be really interesting if you could talk about how you handle that change in your next post (unless I am just completely wrong in my guess). Have their been particular times when it has been more difficult to allow another to make decisions? How have you handled it? I think it would be valuable to all and very interesting.

Interestingly (to me at least), my other two sons have also had similar conversations (as Reid's comment above) with their mother about me and the transition of leadership at Advisa.  Additionally, Heather has informed me that several employees have had like conversations with her.  The gist of them all is, “Can he really let go?” with the underlying implication, “I don’t believe he can really let go.”

My outlook is really very different than what others are thinking.  I’m not letting go of decisions.  Neither am I outsourcing decision-making or planning.  And I’m not ceding responsibility.  That may be the appearance, but that’s not what’s going on – at least in my head.

Here’s what I am doing:  I’m transitioning to a new career and a new phase in life.  Once the organizational planning decision was made to turn things over to Heather, I started planning how I’d do that.  My role is no longer making most decisions; it’s laying the groundwork to influence them.  I concluded that my job would be less to run the company than to support Heather in running it well.  Thus, my job is not so much running our business as it is coaching others’ to be successful running theirs. 

I’m not missing what I was doing.  I am enjoying what I am doing – and, planning what I’ll be doing next.  For those of you contemplating embarking on a similar succession planning process, I think that mind-set is fundamental to success – especially if you’re highest A.  Plan out what you’re going to be in control of as part of your process and be in control of that – be comfortable handing over what you’re no longer going to be in control of to others.  Then, the succession planning process becomes easy – it becomes your plan to execute.

If you think my insight might be helpful in helping you craft your business decisions, drop me an email at bwilson@advisausa.com.  I look forward to hearing from you and potentially aiding your process.

Many of my career moves between companies have been aided by contacts I’ve developed through networking.  In my current work, I’ve gained clients through the same method. This process is most effective when you communicate regularly with people you know and actively support their efforts too.

As noted by the author of a recent Ad Age article, it is important to remind ourselves of the “two-way” nature of networking in employee recruiting.

While word-of-mouth connections have been among the best HR practices since people began talking, the power of an individual’s voice has been multiplied by the advent of social networking tools like LinkedIn & Facebook. Your recruiting strategy will benefit by encouraging active networking on sites like this, in addition to traditional face-to-face venues such as community groups and industry associations.

One of the things I enjoy about the networking game is you can get to know people without the pressure of formal candidate assessment procedures. You can only gain this benefit if you’re “in the game” on a regular basis. The hunt for work is an ongoing process that requires your participation.