I often look through the lens of history for lessons in leadership and strategy that can be applied in business. Unfortunately, it seems as most of the pivotal events of human history involve wars. And while war is an odious event, there are many lessons to learn—both good and bad from the leaders that give birth to the events as well as from the leaders and followers that prosecute them.
One of the great things about my view on innovation is that it’s not the sole domain of the engineers, researchers and technologists. My definition of innovation might invite a bit of controversy, but it allows me to extend it to everyone and every function in an organization. There are no boundaries that limit where innovation can take place. The faster you get people focused on problem-solving and in the mindset of “seizing opportunities,” the more effective you will be at pushing fear out the door in favor of value creating activities. It’s time to push the “GO” button on your innovation machine.
There’s enough negative going around. Here’s a few worth reading that will leave you thinking and maybe even feeling a bit more upbeat. Students of strategy and performance excellence might want to take a closer look at how McDonald’s is using leadership, strategy, customer relations and information to successfully beat back the economic doldrums. And for an extended dose of hope and encouragement, check out the March issue of Fast Company, where the focus is on the world’s most innovative companies.
The best leaders understand their role in creating the effective working environment, and they understand that part of this is creating the conditions for collaboration to take root and grow. On the other hand, ineffective leaders find ways to stifle collaboration, often through managing by fear and intimidation. Negative tactics might drive momentary compliance, but you cannot mandate creativity at the end of a gun barrel.
The first article is Finding and Grooming Breakthrough Innovators by Jeffrey Cohn, Jon Katzenbach and Gus Vlak. Article number two ratchets up the innovation theme with Reinventing Your Business Model by some true heavy hitters.
After many years of leading and now several years of working with aspiring and experienced leaders in all manner of industries and cultures, I remain convinced that most individuals lack proper context for their role as leaders. The great leaders at all levels understand that they have a unique responsibility and unique power to adapt and form their working environment to the unique circumstances at a point in time. Less effective leaders allow the environment to form around the wrong issues including ego (theirs) and petty politics. The lessons of Pixar are hard-won and the outcomes visible to all. You would be well served to listen, learn and apply some of Mr. Catmul’s wisdom to your environment.
Ever since terms like reengineering, right sizing and downsizing became part of the corporate lexicon; midlevel managers have been taking it on the chin. This once populous class has been synergized and right-sized almost to extinction. Those that remain often struggle with spans of control as wide as the Golden Gate Bridge and limited authority that is constantly challenged from above and below. I find it just a bit ironic (and appropriate) that this much-abused class of leader may just hold the key to surviving and prospering in tough times.
Product Management's position in the organization is a topic that invites vigorous debate, usually around whether marketing or development should own the function. While any debate about optimal organization structure can sound a lot like the radio and television sports shows where people argue fiercely over the greatest running back or quarterback of all time (there is no one right answer!), the PM issue merits some consideration. Of course, the right answer may be, "It depends."
One of the many priceless discussion threads during the interview, focused on the challenges of developing leadership and individual contributor talent in technical organizations. Specifically, he railed at the "single career-track" approach that in his opinion results in many otherwise great individual contributors pursuing leadership roles for the wrong reasons regardless of their interest or capabilities for leading. There is wisdom in his perspective.
