Leading from Behind

McKinsey Quarterly just published a terrific interview with Diane L. Schueneman, head of Merrill Lynch's Global Infrastructure Services. (Requires a free, quick registration at McKinsey to read.)

In my opinion she describes helpful strategies for delivering exceptional results in delivery of new and ongoing IT services in support of Merrill's customer service objectives. Pay close attention to the employee empowerment and development she advocates.

I suspect she's mastered the knack of Leading from Behind.

A great read.

The Survey You'll Never See

It amazes me that companies don't understand that their HR departments are part of the company service experience. I don't know of any HR departments that survey "customers" (candidates) about their interview and hiring (or not) experience.

Imagine, a company who focused on hiring "excellence". What would they be like?

Well, I think it would focus on treating all candidates with dignity and respect. And that would translate into specific measurable tasks.

Imagine the positive impression that a post interview survey might make. Imagine getting an email with a link to an electronic survey that might ask questions similar to the following:

Thank you for your interest in ABC Company. We strive to continually improve our recruiting and hiring processes and to provide a dignified and respectful candidate experience. Your honest responses to the following survey will help us continually improve our hiring practices and to continue to promote and practice our guiding values.

1. Did your interview start on time?
2. Did we explain our recruiting process?
3. Did we commit to keeping you informed of the progress for the position hire?
4. Did the recruiter's description/understanding of the position you applied for, match with the job advertisement you applied to?
5. Did your interview offer you adequate opportunity to disclose your qualifications and interest in the position?
6. Did your interviewer seem interested and engaged in your personal qualifications?
7. Did your interviewer offer you the opportunity to ask further questions after the interview?
8. If you took advantage of the opportunity to ask further questions after your interview, were your questions answered to your satisfaction? Were they answered promptly?
9. If we found a more suitable candidate, for the position you applied for, were you informed in a timely and respectful way?
10. If we determined that another candidate was a better fit for the position you applied for, was your experience one that would still make you willing to apply for a future position with our company?

What a tremendous opportunity to demonstrate your commitment to corporate values and to provide your company with a competitive advantage in the hiring process.

It's one that most companies don't take advantage of.

Hiring is a Two Way Street.

I wonder how many companies understand that their recruiting processes are a two way street. While hiring companies are evaluating candidates, candidates are auditioning YOU.

As an example, many candidates I've spoken with have a pretty comprehensive intelligence gathering regimen, that includes some obvious tasks and some not so obvious ones.

1. Your Target Company website is usually a first stop to gather information about the company's industry, products, services, management, financials and values. It's a Cliff notes source of information about you. Poorly constructed websites or those with poor or boilerplate narratives say a lot about you. This one is a pretty obvious step - a great place to go for "the basics".

2. Google Alerts. Some candidates setup a Google alert (or some other Newsbot) on the company. They want to know whenever Company A's name is used on the web, whether in the mainstream news, or a mention in a blog. What other people say about your potential future employer can provide valuable insights. It's also a great way to stay absolutely current on company events, for a potential interview.

Google Alerts can provide links to individuals with investing advice on the company (i.e. the company may be purchased within the next year - or expect soft financial performance over the next 24 months. It can also provide you with links to fan websites (or dissatisfied customers, distributors or partners. They can also alert you to philanthropic and community initiatives.

3. Professional contacts network. Vendors are a great source of information about a company. If you have a solid professional network (consultants, service providers etc), they are usually willing to provide some additional insights into how easy the company is to deal with, strengths and weaknesses of their staff etc. Obviously the depth of the insights will depend upon confidentiality agreements and the strength of your relationship with your professional network (can you be trusted with the information?).

In one case, I was able to get insights into a department that I would be managing from a vendor who had just completed a big project for the company.

4. Personal contacts network (either your Rolodex or perhaps a networking service like LinkedIn or Plaxo Pulse. Candidates can use these to check out senior management at your target company or even anyone who happens to work at the company. You'd be surprised how much information your employees are willing to share with someone they've never met!

And depending upon your age and the kind of job you're seeking, social networking sites like Twitter, MySpace, Facebook might provide some additional insights.

5. Checking the industry competition (websites, financials) helps to provide some industry context to your target company. Is your prospective employer the lead dog or a bit player?

6. Personal experience with the target company HR recruiter. Are you treated with respect? Does the company answer questions or respond to follow-up communications promptly? If your first impression of the company is less than satisfactory, one wonders what the employee experience would be like. The Waiter Rule is always in effect.

So, if your company is having difficulty finding great candidates, it might be a good idea to perform a Corporate Self-Exam. Research your company in the same way your candidates do and fix what needs fixing.

Gary Hamel Speaks. You Should Listen.

Is your company less than the sum of it's parts? Gary Hamel says that it could very well be the way its being managed, in his new book "The Future of Management".

Here's a short video promoting the premise of the book, from the author himself.



Perhaps you should consider adding this to your Christmas list. Understanding how to get more out of your people and processes would be the ideal Christmas gift for any business person.

Seven Words that Change the Game

This past weekend, I saw a documentary on Warren Buffett, one of the world's richest men. Warren's "secret" to investing is simple...and extremely difficult. Simply locate undervalued companies, whose businesses you understand and buy them.

The documentary focused on Berkshire Hathaway's most recent acquisition, a company based in Israel, that makes cutting tools, used in a wide variety of manufacturing companies.

This is significant because it's the first time he has purchased a non-American company.

But this isn't what caught my attention.

Rather, it was an offhanded comment he made discussing where to search for the next great value. The reporter didn't catch it and never followed up with a question.

The comment was: "Your competitors know everything that you do."

As soon as those words were spoken, a lightbulb went on in my head. I have spent years in various businesses talking strategy, identifying core competencies, trying to identify and leverage competitive advantage.

These exercises were both energizing and comforting. We, after all, had a competitive advantage - core competencies that we could rely on to drive us "to the next level". We could take solice in the fact that we possessed the magic, secret sauce (whatever that was) that allowed us to continue to make money and keep the shareholders happy.

I wonder how the tenor of the sessions might have changed, had Warren Buffett been in the room and had made the statement.

Would we have had a heightened sense of urgency? Would we have become more action oriented? Would we have stressed results accountability more? Would we have generated "bigger ideas"?

"Your competitors know everything that you do". Seven words that change the game.

Try opening your next strategy session with Warren Buffett's statement and see if it changes the entire nature of the debate.

Making the Heath Brothers Proud

This video, from O'Reilly Radar demonstrates the impact of how a typical home's energy consumption impacts greenhouse gas emissions. It is a great example of "sticky" communications.

The Heath Brothers (Dan and Chip) would be proud.

Dan and Chip Heath wrote the bestseller Made to Stick, which is a guide to understanding the essential elements of how to effectively communicate an idea. The video demonstrates all six principles of "sticky" communications.

(Sorry, if you want to know what the principles are, you should really buy the book!)

It's the Content, Stupid.

Norman Lear (writer/creator of most of the prime time situation comedies of the seventies and eighties, like All in the Family, Maude, Golden Girls among MANY) said something interesting on Morning Joe this morning.

When asked what he watches on TV these days he mentioned the shows South Park and Curb Your Enthusiasm, to which Joe Scarboro noted "those aren't network shows".

"I don't know. I don't have time to watch TV. My Tivo goes out and finds the content." (not an exact quote, but close enough).

I imagine that the network brand managers at NBC, ABC and CBS are now on suicide watch.

And it got me thinking. I know the names of the three major networks (four if you include FOX) and have watched them for years, but for the life of me I could not describe their "brand".

To add to the woes of the network brand managers, in my house the networks are known as channels 4, 5, 6 and 12.

Yet in some sort of attempt to "network brand" each show, they superimpose that translucent logo in the lower right hand corner of the screen. In an age of 200 channels, DVRs and Tivo, what exactly is this supposed to accomplish?

Are there really people out there who channel surf, looking for the CBS "eye" or the NBC "peacock"?

I don't think so.

And add to the mix, all the specialty channels for DIY shows, Outdoor, Explorer, Discovery, National Geographic, Sports, Business, Shopping, News and the traditional broadcast network brands mean even less.

Sorry folks. Take the network logo off my screen and focus on improving the content and I'll watch. For me, it doesn't work the other way around.