Leadership: A Battle Strategy

It's a good thing to believe the people leading you into that metaphorical battle has his or her next steps planned out and ready to execute on command. How is this accomplished? Is there really a grand scheme by which every move made has an anchor? We'd like to think that to be sure. Success involves executing a well thought out strategy that has been thoroughly scrutinized. This is my take on how a well run business might do this.

Traditional Planning Methods 

The traditional way for government organizations to plan is for a group of people, usually executives/management, but sometimes including employees, to get together for some period of time each year. Generally, inadequate time is allocated to the exercise, but if it is completed, it results in a document that contains a mission statement, broad organizational goals, and other elements as is deemed appropriate. Then, the plan is usually hidden away somewhere, never to be seen again. Traditional methods yield traditional results. As a wise man once said "If you keep doing what you have been doing, you will get what you have always got". It needn't be this way. 

Reconceptualizing Strategic Planning

Planning should be considered as a blueprint for change. The plan should be the basis for introducing controlled change into an organization so it can adapt to changing times. By anticipating shifting demands, the plan serves the purpose of allowing the organization to control its own direction, rather than waiting until political forces demand change (and demand change NOW). In addition, the plan allows for consistent monitoring of success, and re-examination of the degree to which organizational resources should be structured and allocated to achieve future goals. 

But, if we look at strategic planning in this light, as a blueprint for change, we also need to consider that any organization has built-in inertia.. the tendency to keep on doing what one has been doing. On its own, the strategic planning process, as traditionally undertaken, is insufficient to overcome this inertia. Other forces need to come into play if the plan, and proposed changes get implemented. 

Leadership - The Key Force 

In the context of strategic planning, leadership means a number of things. We can outline the role of leadership in the following ways, keeping in mind that leadership may come from appointed leaders (management and executive) and from the ranks

1. Those in leadership roles ensure that as many members of the organization as possible buy into the values, mission, and broad organizational goals. There are two components to this function. First, leaders manage the perceptions of staff with respect to the planning process. Remember that most people have experienced the "plan-in-the-drawer" syndrome, where effort expended in planning is seen as wasted when the plan is ignored. Prior to the planning process, leaders must emphasize that THIS TIME, things will be different. 

Second, leaders manage the planning process so that staff feel that they have adequate input into the process, that they are heard, and their values and visions are incorporated into the final plan and its implementation. Specifically, leaders arrange things so that the process is open, and conforms to accepted rules of communication. That may mean hiring an external consultant to orchestrate the planning sessions. It will certainly mean that rules get established to guide participation. Everyone who wants to participate should have the opportunity, and even reticent staff should be gently encouraged to involve themselves. 

2. While managing perceptions of the planning process is important, the critical role of leadership occurs after the plan has been completed. Leaders must treat the planning results as the "organizational signposts that guide behaviour and decision making". After all, nobody is going to take a plan seriously if the formal leaders ignore it, or never refer to it again. 

If you are serious about using strategic planning as a tool for organizational success, consider some of the following actions.

A. When working with staff to set individual objectives, be sure to mention how the individual objectives will contribute to the achievement of the mission and organizational goals as outlined in the strategic plan. Make sure that the employee is familiar with the plan when individual objectives are set. 

In addition, at each meeting with each employee, work with the employee to help him/her determine how the values outlined in the strategic plan apply to them. In other words, given the particular values, strategic goals and mission statement how is the employee to behave or make decisions. 

B. Once the strategic plan has been completed, the formal leader of the organization (and perhaps others) should present and discuss the plan with the up-line manager or executive. It is NOT sufficient to send a copy. Because you will need up-line support to implement the plan, you will need their commitment, and commitment will only come from discussion and explanation of the plan. 

C. At staff meetings, when decisions are required, explain how the strategic plan is used, or is to be used to make decisions. If you are the manager communicating a decision you have made, explain your rationale in light of the mission, values and goals expressed in the plan. If you are using a participative decision making process, help staff refocus on these components of the plan, so that they can be used to guide decision making

D. When doing performance reviews with staff, ask the individual to explain how his or her actions are consistent with the elements of the plan. How has their action contributed to organizational goals? Has their behaviour been consistent with organizational values? What needs to change so that the individual can further contribute to implementing the plan? Consider recognizing contributions to achievement of the plan, even if the individual did not have specific responsibility as outlined in their individual objectives. And, when setting future objectives, consider writing an objective that refers to the values expressed in the plan. For example: "Will act in accordance with the organizational values expressed in the strategic plan". If you go this route, make sure -that~the implications of these values are clear to the employee in terms of his or her behaviour. 

3. A final role of leadership is to create more leaders. One goal that formal leaders (executives, managers) can set for themselves is to encourage down-line employees to take on some of the leadership roles outlined above. This can be particularly effective in decision making. The ideal situation is for staff to internalize the plan to the extent that some take on the role of reminding people of the plan, and its relevance to any given decision-making process. Cultivate leaders in your organization by giving increased responsibility, and encouraging this kind of leadership behaviour. 

Conclusion 

Leadership, regardless of when it comes from formally appointed leaders, or Informal leaders, provides the link between planning and doing. Effective leadership helps alter perceptions about strategic planning, and the organization itself, helping to overcome inertia, the tendency to keep things the same. 

Without leadership, most strategic plans will end up as dead pieces of paper. Most importantly, when planning occurs without leadership, cynicism increases when staff see that the plan is being ignored, or even violated. The outcome of this is that formal leaders suffer a loss of credibility.  

Performance Issues Amongst Us

One of the toughest tasks for any manager or supervisor is to determine  the cause of a performance problem.  Since decisions to remediate the  problem will depend on the diagnosis, accurate assessment is crucial.  I will attempt to outline a model of factors influencing employee/team performance, so that you are less likely to ignore a possible source of  performance deficit.  

The Nature of Performance 

Work performance is influenced by a number of factors.  When  performance is excellent, it is a result of a number of circumstances that  work together to make this excellence possible.  So, stellar performance  requires that ALL relevant influences on behavior are in place. Sadly, poor performance can result from a SINGLE factor or influence that  drastically reduces effectiveness.  Frequently, a performance problem that  is allowed to continue unchecked will expand as other influences turn from  positive to negative.   

A Seven Factor Model 

We can suggest seven factors that influence or determine the level of  performance.  These factors are multiplicative in nature.  For those of you  whose favorite subject in schools was NOT math, this means that  performance will be as strong as the weakest link in the chain of  performance determinants.  If there is a deficit in any one of these factors,  performance will suffer.  This is emphasized in a team environment.

Factor 1: Aptitude 

Aptitude refers to a person's native ability to perform the task or tasks.   Each of us has strengths and weaknesses that determine if we can learn or  perform a task.  Poor aptitude for a task could mean that the person could  never learn how to do it, even with all the supports in the world.   Assessing aptitude is very difficult.   

Factor 2: Skill Level 

Even the simplest responsibilities require skills.  Skills differ from  aptitudes in that they can be learned, up to the limits imposed by aptitude.   To assess whether a performance deficit is a result of lack of skill, ask the  questions, "If his/her life depended on it, could the person do the task?"   If the answer is no, then it could be a skill problem.   

Factor 3: Understanding of Task 

A person must understand the nature of the task, and what is expected.  If  this clear communication is lacking, no amount of skill or motivation will  bring about effective performance.  Performance management is the  common means for conveying understanding of the task.  The best way to  assess an employee's understanding is to ask questions within a coaching  environment.   

Factor 4: Choice to Expend Effort 

This, and the next factor are motivational factors.  If a person has the  aptitude, skills and understanding of the task required, it may be that there  are factors causing the person to "not make the effort".  These may be  personal or related to the work environment.  Assessing whether there is  a motivational problem is difficult, and can best be done by examining  other indicator behaviours (absenteeism, lack of participation in meetings,  or other factors that suggest a motivational problem.   

Factor 5: Choice of Degree of EffortTo Expend 
Sometimes effort is not an on/off thing.  An employee may be putting in  a limited amount of effort and therefore producing inferior results.     


Factor 6: Choice To Persist 

You can make quantum leaps in productivity, morale, employee/team motivation through learning how to delegate effectively. It's not hard to learn but it's a bit more complex than most managers think. Learn to delegate properly and when your department hits on all cylinders.

Performance requires that effort be initiated and sustained over time.  This  motivational factor may result in projects started but never completed.  If  an employee is not persisting in tasks, it can indicate boredom, fear of  failure, or may relate to a lack of skills.  Careful, diplomatic discussion is  required to uncover if and why this may be occurring.   

Factor 7: Outside Factors 

Performance can be reduced due to factors beyond the control of the  individual/team.  The organization itself may be setting barriers to performance,  or uncooperative co-workers and managers may contribute.  Discussion  with the employee during performance management should include  reference to factors outside the control of the employee that impede  progress.  If these outside factors are allowed to continue,  unacknowledged, motivational levels will drop, complicating the issue and  creating a chronic under-performer.   

Conclusion: 

It is important that performance problems be addressed as soon as they  occur, and the above factors be examined to determine whether they are  contributing to the problem.  By working with the employee or team in a  cooperative way, it is possible to identify and remediate some of the  underlying causes of work performance problems. Remember this most importantly. We are all on the same team working towards the same ultimate goal. We have to help each other both in accountability and in praise. Ego and pride can be extremely detrimental to the bottom line. Especially when dealing with others. Objectivity and non-judgement should be the order of the day.

Taking Another Look at "The Team"

I wanted to touch on working as a team once again. It's a part of most businesses and involves dynamics that can make or break a company. The importance of team untity in order to succeed is undervalued due to many factors. With the recent boon in the tech world, models pertaining to how groups of workers interact have changed dramatically.

In the last fifteen years, organizational structure has undergone a shift from the individual climb up the corporate ladder to an increasing emphasis on work teams and groups. The shift to work teams is largely due to factors such as globalization, downsizing and the need for technological efficiency. As companies expand and tasks become more complex, more and more specialists are needed within organizations. These specialists must learn to work together so that colleagues have an understanding of the role and responsibility of those whose skill sets differ from their own. 

In addition, the convergence of products, services and technology from around the world has forced companies to work in a cross functional environment for which the best organizational design is often working in teams.

There are other reasons for the emergence of work teams as well. Stiff competition, particularly in technology-driven fields, requires teamwork with a concerted effort to keep the company as a whole on the cutting edge. Because technology-driven tasks have become far too complex for one person to handle alone, many organizations create work teams to accomplish collective goals.

In addition, organizations are all but eliminating middle management as a result of downsizing efforts. Shifting authority down to members of a work team allows management to capitalize on a positive synergy that results in significant increases in productivity. When teams operate in such a way that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, productivity invariably increases.

A well-functioning team can bring out the best in its members because problem solving skills and creativity increase with mutual support that builds moral. The characteristics that make a team effective include complementary skill sets, a sense of accountability among the team as a whole, and a synergistic approach to problem solving. Most importantly, the team must have a desire to work together to implement solutions. A team that functions efficiently learns to benefit from the diversity of skills among its members, and the result is much more than can be accomplished by each member of that team working alone. 

It follows that the single most important factor in determining whether a team will work well and be productive is a sense of teamwork. This foundation should be in place before the team’s tasks are even defined. With a sense of teamwork and the right mix of skills, teams will have the basis for functioning autonomously and the commitment to accomplish their goals.

Work teams are usually self-managed, which is very different from the traditional management approach of holding individuals responsible for the whole group. Though they function collaboratively, most teams have a member who can function in a leadership role. When teams develop, natural leaders should be allowed to emerge. 

Team leaders have a role that is very different from traditional managers. The leader may facilitate group activities, such as brainstorming sessions in which no idea is a bad idea. With a free expression of ideas in an environment that encourages people to think actively, team members are more likely to proactively seek solutions in a way that allows every member of the team to participate according to his or her strengths and level of skill. When every member of the team is engaged, the group as a whole is productive.

While at best work teams operate to increase productivity, there are many challenges that can affect their efficiency and lead frustrated human resource managers to abandon the effort entirely. For example, members of a team can suffer from “groupthink,” the belief that every member already knows what the others will propose as solutions. When this happens, teams can become paralyzed by inaction. 

Issues related to globalization create what are perhaps the most daunting challenges to teams. As national borders become transparent and economies intertwine, there is an increased risk of choosing solutions that isolate or marginalize some team members because the solutions are based on preconceived notions that do not apply across international borders.

Other problems faced by struggling work teams are due to interpersonal clashes in personality or work style. For example, employees who feel they should not have to make decisions may balk at the idea of working in self-directed teams. Virtual teams have a special challenge as a result of their dependence on communications technology to do their jobs and the fact that technology may be their only vehicle for establishing trust and working relationships.

While many managers and executives view teams as the most effective design for involving all employees in the success of a company, they may not be skilled in the group dynamics needed to run teams effectively. This, along with the fact that many people are initially more comfortable working alone, may cause executives to be skeptical about the value of work teams and hesitant to take the necessary steps to create them. With some basic planning and preparation, however, most organizations can implement a system of work teams that thrive.

Human resource managers can do a variety of things to support team efforts. Management should communicate clear expectations for the team’s performance, as well as a rationale for why the team was created. Sufficient resources (people, time and money) must be allocated to the team and its tasks as well. 

Written policies and procedures that fit team practices can be developed to address issues like hiring, peer-based performance evaluations, and disciplining employees. When necessary, workshops and training sessions can be offered to improve the communication skills needed to function effectively as a team. Finally, managers can bring in external facilitators and mediators to help resolve conflicts, particularly when such conflicts become personal.