Feb 27, 2011 | Leadership, Personal Rant, Strategy
It seems to me that the government is on the horns of a dilemma.
On one hand, they need to appease the Greens, securing their votes, by introducing a carbon tax, a course of action that seems very sensible in the long run when you consider the weight of scientific evidence.
However, in so doing, Gillard will break what honest John Howard would call a “core promise” not to introduce one, hamstringing her ability to sell such a substantial change, at least without an election where the intention is on the table.
We have a two pace economy, digging stuff up and flogging it is the foundation of current prosperity, but we are no longer making anything, and the current “skills shortage” has little to do with employment levels, but everything to do with the gutting of education, particularly trade skills, over the last 25 years.
Now we are going to gut manufacturing, or what is left of it, with a tax that will do nothing to abate worldwide carbon levels, although it may make those who do not have to produce anything to make a living feel good.
There is some merit in the argument that a tax will stimulate innovation in the development of alternatives, and Australia should be in a good position to leverage the innovation, particularly as regards solar, but that is long term, the pain to manufacturing will be immediate, and I wonder if it is worth the pain, even if a miracle happens, and Gillard et al can sell it, and get re-elected at the same time.
This is what strategy is all about, choices, weighing the relative merits of a range of seemingly mutually exclusive options, determining where the best long term use of limited resources lies, whilst maintaining the current P&L. Posturing will not stand up to scrutiny, it takes intellectual honesty and transparency to make tough decisions and have the stakeholders prepared to support a course of action. Pity there is little of either evident in Canberra, or in the states.
Now we have sorted the carbon management issue, consideration needs to be given to a whole range of other strategic choices in health, education, taxation, Australia’s relationships, immigration, defense, and so on.
We seem to be a bit short on the vision thing!.
Feb 17, 2011 | Leadership, Management
This is a story of 2 bosses.
One bloke I worked for over a considerable period in two different corporations never told me exactly what to do. We agreed outcomes and the resources to achieve them, project time frames and milestones, and he was always willing to discuss, encourage, provide council, and play devils advocate, but never directed, but through the conversations, always knew exactly what was going on, and was engaged in the process. This left me with the responsibility for the outcome, and a personal commitment to achieve it.
The second bloke wanted to micro manage activity, providing a continuous stream of “advice” that were in fact instructions, which left me with no feeling of personal responsibility. I had the authority to get stuff done, but little engagement with the outcome beyond staying out of trouble, until we parted in mutual frustration.
This recognition of the differences between authority and responsibility is more than a matter of style, it is the core of leadership, and success.
Feb 13, 2011 | Collaboration, Leadership
These terms are often used as synonyms, as managers seek to evolve a culture of inclusion and shared responsibility, but they are markedly different.
Collaboration is essential, and now so much easier given digital the tools to hand, and increased understanding of what motivates and engages individuals, but does not necessarily lead to consensus. Successful enterprises are rarely democracies, but they are very good at nurturing diversity, and hearing all points of view before making decisions, then gaining support for action, even from dissenters, by ensuring “due process” has been followed, which requires an understanding of the purpose of the collaboration, and a buy in to the outcomes.
Feb 10, 2011 | Innovation, Leadership
Real, lasting learning comes when you get stuff wrong, then seek to understand why you got it wrong. The obvious paradox is that by doing nothing new, or different, by staying inside the accepted practice, you get nothing wrong, and often receive accolades as a result. However, by working at the edge, of the process, or your own capabilities, and getting things wrong, you learn, often whilst suffering the bruises from others because you “stuffed up”.
As George Bernard Shaw said “all great things start as blasphemies”, so to learn, go out and blaspheme!
Feb 9, 2011 | Innovation, Leadership
The verb “to Google” took only a few years to emerge as Google changed the world around us.
Peter Norvig was Google’s research director from its early days, playing a key role in building the phenomenon that is Google.
His basic thesis is that you must be prepared to experiment extensively, and be wrong often, indeed, celebrate being wrong, as that is the way to learn.
However, mistake tolerance can be a two edged sword if the same mistakes keep getting made, and no-one pays the piper. An acceptance of repeated similar mistakes, clearly where no learning has taken place is hugely counter-productive, but not far removed from the desired culture of mistake tolerance so valued by successful innovators like Google.
Feb 3, 2011 | Leadership, Management
When was the last time you saw people around the water cooler laughing like a bunch of kids, in work-time?
Did you think that perhaps they were being frivolous, wasting the organisations time?
If you did, you would not be alone, as we seem to take ourselves too seriously, and our organisations tend to frown on what is seen as frivolity.
However, when you think about it, laughter is a sign of strong, positive personal relationships, something most organisations work for, so laughter should be seen as a symptom of success, not frivolity.
In a new book, Tom Rath who leads Gallups workplace consulting practice argues in his new book “Vital Friends” that a person with a “best friend” at work is 7 times more likely to be engaged in work than the average.
The book is a the result of a pile of research, but when you stop and think about it, the notion of productivity being associated with being happy makes absolute sense.
