Leaders who lead

The word “leader” can have a range of meanings depending on the context.

It can mean someone who holds a position of power, and it just defines the position. It can also describe someone who inspires, who points the way, who commands loyalty without asking for it, totally independent of the position held.

Years ago, in a factory I was running, there was a quiet bloke, uneducated, and unassuming, but one who could make or break any initiative management proposed in the factory.  He led, not by position, but simply by the force of his presence, and capacity to engage and inspire the others in the factory. He was a “leader” who led.

SME shock absorbers

    All businesses are conflicted, small ones more obviously than larger ones.

    On one hand, the immediate urgency to do whatever necessary to generate the cash to pay the bills, and on the other, the necessity to build capability, relationships, and definitive market position, all critical elements for commercial  sustainability, but there is rarely enough time to do both as well as you would like.

    There is no easy answer to this dilemma, but in my work with small businesses there are a number of strategies, largely borrowed from large businesses that pay dividends:

  1. Act like a larger organization internally, by doing things such as having a formal monthly management meeting, regular formal performance reviews, an overt strategy generation process that involves employees, and detailed operational planning.
  2. Delegate both responsibility and authority clearly. Often those who start businesses do so because they want to feel in control, and delegation does not come easily
  3. Spend 50% of your time (assuming you are the CEO) outside the businesses with customers, and demand chain partners building relationships.
  4. Small businesses benefit hugely from these disciplines, partly because they are so important for the smooth running of any businesses, and partly because it acts as an “insulation” to the unanticipated. Most in small businesses do not see the need, as they are in daily contact with all in and around the businesses, and therefore, some of  these things are seen as unnecessary bureaucracy, when in reality they are more like shock absorbers. 

“Opt in” marketing

 

Social media, as I keep saying, has changed the rules completely.

 In the pre-digital days of mass marketing, the consumer simply ignored most of the stuff thrown at them, and there was no genuinely effective mechanism to measure the waste.

Now, using the tools of the web the task has changed, as we can measure many dimensions of a messages effectiveness  very quickly, and effectively, so the waste is measurable, and the degree of engagement, or “opt-in” becomes a key performance measure of marketing.

This is a whole lot harder than going to lunch with the ad agency, and then just throwing money at the TV or popular magazine in the hope that some of it would stick, as we can now measure not just awareness, but the degree of consumer “opt-in” any communication generates. 

Having a goal can be counter-productive.

Continuous improvement initiatives I have seen almost always impose a “finishing line”, correctly believing that focusing on an objective is a key to motivate performance.

However,  what they often miss in this approach to improvement is the cultural aspect of continuous improvement, the recognition that there is no finishing line, just the next challenge, and the real management challenge is to build a capacity to improve continuously as a foundation of the culture of the business,not just to address the current issue.

Another of the many paradox’s that exist in our world, to motivate, have a goal, but having a goal other than an inbuilt desire to do it better today than you did yesterday, can be counter-productive

 

brand trashing

If you ever needed evidence of the power of social tools on the net to influence your brands, look at what is happening currently to the Wyeth S26 baby formula.

Greenpeace did a couple of tests that indicated there may be genetically modified ingredients in S26, a news program picked up on the tests, and overnight, the “twittersphere” is overrun with negative comments, and I am sure health Minister Nicola Roxons in-box is full.

Wyeth is yet to respond, at least as far as I have seen. Only 24 hours, and the damage to S26, a brand that has taken 25 years to build, has been trashed. If you have not got contingency plans in place to counter this when it happens to you, I think you are mad!