Organisations tend to offer change management programmes in an effort to align their employees values with that of the organisation and its mission statement. What many seem to overlook is that an organisations values are demonstrated to its customers via the behaviours of its people - not by their values!

Why do many organisations feel the need “launch” their change management programmes and draw attention to them? In truth this often serves to create fear and unsettle employees, who after all, pretty much want thing to stay the same - just improved!

NLP can assist in the holistic communication of change. Organisations are changing every day in some way so why the need to shout about introducing radical change?

NLP in coaching can be used to assist individuals through change - or it can be used as an extremely effective methodology to create change within the organisation as a whole.  Tools and techniques for understanding the varied outcomes of the communication and the effects of the change can assist a smoother implementation. By concentrating on the behavioural aspects rather than attempting to change values and attitudes (and let’s face it - when was the last time you changed your views just because somebody told you to?).

Get the behaviours right and the perception of organisational values will come back to your through your customers.

A new approach to conducting business must arise from the ashes of a failed capitalist model. For companies to survive and thrive in challenging times, an economic logic of short-term profit-maximisation must be joined by a social logic of long-term institution building. Fortunately, there are prominent companies throughout the world that already reflect a new model of values-based capitalism, which involves investment for the longer term, a sense of enduring purpose and a focus on serving society through innovation that solves challenging problems.

Values-based capitalism is my catch-all phrase for the wide swathe from ethical behaviour to above-and-beyond social contributions. It means being guided by standards and principles that are not reducible only to economics. It implies responsibilities toward employees, customers, consumers, suppliers, communities and the public that are shaped by social norms even when there are no specific laws governing the relationships. Values-based leadership in an empowering system is not just a way to regain public trust; it is a better way to run a company, because it creates a climate in which innovation can flourish.

Service to society, guided by well-articulated values, is not just ‘nice to do’ but an integral part of the business models for companies that I call ‘the vanguard’. At these companies, values, principles and attention to society have moved from the sidelines to the centre of business strategy.

Vanguard companies use their strengths to provide innovative solutions to a wide range of societal challenges. Some are directly connected to business opportunities, such as General Electric’s embracing of the opportunities in green technologies. Others address problems without an immediate market opportunity but end up developing useful technologies with later commercial applications.

For example, IBM’s activities to improve basic education and literacy resulted in new voice-recognition technology; ICICI Bank’s desire to improve the lives of poor, rural villagers in India and build an eventual market for banking services led to breakthroughs in mobile banking through mobile phones. Societal initiatives undertaken without immediate profit motives are part of the culture that builds high performance and thus, ironically, results in profits.

IBM is a prime example. Since its founding in 1911, IBM has been known for a strong culture and a commitment to fairness and social responsibility, operating under a set of principles articulated by its founder. But as IBM entered its second century, it took a fresh look at its culture through strategic use of IBM technology and innovation. In 2003, CEO Sam Palmisano authorised a bold, global dialogue called a ‘values jam’, a 72-hour web chat about what IBM stands for. Open to every IBM user in the world, it attracted contributions from nearly 150,000 people. Palmisano wanted people to have pride in IBM as an institution, which would stimulate loyalty and creativity. He told me: ‘Management is temporary, returns are cyclical. The values are the connective tissue that has longevity. We are the only ones in technology to have lasted more than 30 years.’

The result of the ‘values jam’ was three overarching values closely connected to its business purpose: dedication to every client’s success; innovation that matters for the company and the world; trust and personal responsibility in all relationships. These focus employees on service to broad societal goals. An IBM Latin America executive sees this as a trend in IBM users employing an external standard to judge the company’s contributions: ‘I see a change in the way we think about social responsibility. Twenty years ago, the focus was to do the right thing internally. Before, if I saw a problem in society, in the community, I didn’t care because it was not inside IBM; I had nothing to do with it. The change right now is to leverage the size of IBM and do the right thing outside our organisation, through the whole supply chain with providers and customers.’

This focus has led to numerous innovations and diffusion of innovation, with continuing profitability even in tough times. Through IBM’s Reinventing Education initiative, project teams working in partnership with school systems created innovations in data warehousing, interactive mentoring of teachers and students, and tools to teach reading.

Partnerships for innovation with government education ministries in the UK, Brazil, India, China and elsewhere led to new applications of technology that were useful in the commercial business while giving IBM a seat at the table. When IBM had a breakthrough in grid computing (now known as cloud computing), its first demonstration was via a non-profit partnership called World Community Grid, led by IBM but with partners worldwide donating unused computing power from laptops and desktops to big scientific projects, such as AIDS research or climate change.

These are not just random examples of doing occasional good; they reflect a comprehensive set of business practices that constitute the vanguard company paradigm. By thinking beyond today’s customers to the wider world, a vanguard company finds new arenas for social betterment and anticipates markets. This is not altruistic, but it is also not how business self-interest is usually framed. Vanguard company employees come to feel that, if they do not tackle a big societal problem using their special prowess, then who will? Their self-image involves an imperative to innovate, a responsibility to solve problems to improve the world. Companies have always succeeded by emphasising innovation. The new addition is three key words in IBM’s core values: ‘Innovation that matters for the company and the world’. Emphasising ‘for the world’ makes the connection between business and society. A short mental loop connects ‘changing the world’ and ‘my daily job’.

At each phase of the innovation process - generating ideas, selling others on those ideas and executing the projects to turn ideas into reality - purpose-driven companies gain advantages. Their technical capabilities must meet high standards, but that’s not all there is to it. Framing their missions in social terms and reinforcing the desire for social improvement with empowering organisational cultures gives them a boost beyond the technical realm. This is even more important in emerging market countries such as India that are starting to produce some innovations ahead of the US or Europe because companies there face challenging societal problems that force creative solutions.

Sceptics claim that such activities are self-interested. Of course they are. And they should be. Enlightened self-interest makes efforts sustainable, because employees, customers, and shareholders reward good conduct with their loyalty. In the global Millennium Survey, more than 90 per cent of 25,000 citizens of 23 countries reported that they want companies to focus on more than profitability. In another survey, two-thirds of American consumers said they feel more trust in products aligned with social values. 

Let me be clear that this is aspirational. Even the best companies do not meet their ideals all the time; they have vulnerabilities and can be mired in bureaucracy. Their leaders are not soft-hearted do-gooders. The companies mount and defend lawsuits, push the limits of their market dominance and pricing power, compete aggressively and lobby governments for favourable treatment. They are often the best among their peers, but not always. Most of the companies in my research have outperformed the industry in the current global financial crisis, but some did not.

The vanguard company model has limits for society, too. One company can make a difference but not necessarily change the surrounding system, at least not without multiple collaborators and government spreading the change. And this is not philanthropy; some of the worst corporate crimes have been committed by companies with good track records of philanthropy, and corporate donations do not signify well-run companies. What is unique about the vanguard companies I investigated is that values, principles and attention to societal needs pervade every aspect of the company and drive the quest for innovation.

Vanguard companies live up to high aspirations often enough to be role models for a new business paradigm. This new paradigm is particularly timely as the world struggles to recover from financial crisis and also faces ongoing challenges of climate change, educational and economic disparities, political uncertainties in conflict-ridden regions and the potential for border-crossing pandemics. The vanguard companies I studied have mastered the turbulence of technological and geopolitical change by making critical internal changes. They motivate employees to seek and create new ideas, and they have lent their business capabilities to produce innovations from which the general public can benefit.

In the fullest flowering of the model, vanguard companies are global thinkers building global networks. They include an extended family of partners in their strategies, drawing on suppliers, distributors, venture partners or alumni as sources of ideas for innovation. They want to raise standards by attempting to operate by one set of values and principles, taking the highest standard as their common denominator and spreading that ethos to the extended family. They globalise, transcending the particularities of place, and also localise, attempting to deeply understand
the society around them. They take social or human needs as a starting point for the business, seeking solutions that propel innovation. What they get out of all this is not only business opportunities and market position but also innovation, employee motivation, company solidarity and public influence.

Values and principles, including respect for people and concern for the environment, contribute to numerous business capabilities: sensing opportunities and stimulating innovation; enhancing customer success and value for end users; attracting and motivating top talent; working collaboratively to react or change quickly; and tapping the extended family of business partners for new ideas or market reach. All of this creates sustainable institutions capable of survival and renewal in the interests of social good.

Rosabeth Moss Kanter holds the Ernest L Arbuckle Professorship at the Harvard Business School

Vanguard companies in action

• Procter & Gamble’s corporate statement of ‘purpose, values and principles’ is a central tool for guiding the activities of 140,000 people worldwide. The desire to create products that ‘improve the lives of the world’s consumers, now and for generations to come’ led to research on water purification, since a majority of the world’s population lacks access to clean drinking water, contributing to global health problems. But a water purification powder sold in sachets failed to catch on with lower-income consumers at sufficient scale to make it a profitable business, in part because of lack of education about its health benefits. Rather than close the venture, P&G set up a not-for-profit company in partnership with major NGOs and United Nations agencies to continue to distribute the product, called Children’s Safe Drinking Water. This saved lives during the aftermath of the Asian tsunami, has won P&G numerous awards and has been a source of pride for employees, helping the company attract some of the world’s best talent.
• Cemex, which began as Cementos Mexicanos in 1906, is one of the world’s largest building materials companies. Its philosophy is to improve wellbeing through innovative industry solutions and a commitment to sustainability. Its Cemex Way methods have helped it grow successfully through significant international acquisitions and improve productivity and working conditions in cement factories in the US and Europe. It has raised wages and supported community development in Egypt and created innovative solutions for affordable housing in rural Mexico. In 2002, Cemex won a World Environment Center Gold Medal for International Corporate Achievement in Sustainable Development, despite being in one of the most polluting industries, because of its commitment to alternative fuels and environmental clean-up.
• Omron, a Japanese electronics company that describes itself as ’small but global’, invokes its motto - ‘At work for a better life, a better world for all’ - as the impetus for numerous innovations. These include one of the world’s first ATMs, an automated train station, a system to increase safety and reduce deaths in industrial laundries and a blood pressure monitor for women. The Omron Principles, first articulated in 1960, are said to be responsible for its success in acquiring outstanding smaller US
  companies with similar values, without being the highest bidder.
• Banco Real, headquartered in São Paolo, Brazil, makes social and environmental responsibility the centrepiece of its business strategy. Starting early in this decade, it grew quickly to become Brazil’s third largest bank. Its strong culture and high banking and societal standards have made it stronger following the acquisition of its former Dutch parent, ABN AMRO, by Grupo Santander of Spain. Banco Real’s commitment to the environment reinforced ABN AMRO’s successful effort to encourage the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation to write the Equator Principles, guidelines for environmentally friendly project finance, in 2003, which more than 60 major international banks have signed to date.

Profiles International, a global leader in employment evaluation and human resource management assessment tools, released a report identifying five critical components of management failure.

“Our findings indicate that there are five common reasons for management failure,” stated Jim Sirbasku, co-founder and CEO of Profiles International. “One of the findings is that poor interpersonal and communication skills are one of the most prevalent reasons. Our report explores the symptoms of at-risk management and offers remedies and action steps for avoiding derailment.”

When it comes to poor interpersonal and communication skills, there are many symptoms that can be identified in an “at-risk” manager:

Always seems to be feuding with someone or some group in the organization.
Has a reputation for being authoritarian, cold, aloof, arrogant or insensitive.
Acts as a polarizing force in an organization.

• Avoids direct communication or contact with some or all co-workers.
• Delivers bad news through e-mail rather than through direct conversations.
• Exhibits a hostile attitude toward co-workers who share interdependent goals.
• Becomes the target of subtle or blatant sabotage efforts.

“By gaining a better understanding of the behaviors of an at-risk manager, business leaders will be able to quickly identify specific traits and then the steps necessary to prevent derailment and improve performance, ” said Dario Priolo, managing director of the Profiles International Research Institute.

The remedies for preventing derailment and improving performance are: 

• Understand the true root cause of the conflict.
• Understand the management style and motivation of the manager
• Help the manager understand his or her own management and communication style.

For more info: http://forms. piibusiness. com/forms/ ManagementDerail ersReport

A cartoon showed a rapidly sinking boat with people furiously bailing out water at the nearly submerged end. At the momentarily high-and-dry end, one person happily says to another, “Wow! I’m sure glad the leak isn’t at our end!”

And there’s the problem. Too narrow a view of development - one that hopes for development in this industry or that region, within this educational level or that social stratum - ultimately leads to feeble results. If the boat is sinking, only some may drown, but eventually everyone gets wet.

Perhaps we have more talk than results on economic development because we haven’t taken the time to define  alignment, the great goal of transforming leadership. We’re mistaken when we assume alignment means compromise, losing diversity, micromanagement or “to put in a straight line or bring into line.” At its best, to align is to bring oneself into agreement or alliance with a cause. It implies voluntary movement toward a compelling vision. It
gives people something bigger and better to devote themselves to than their self-interest.

There is power in alignment and waste when that alignment disintegrates. An ill-defined sense of alignment can  cripple the ability to bring energy and resources to bear on long-term economic development. If leaders debate who
is in charge, even as they try to dodge responsibility, they’re telling us they are ill-equipped to define a cause. Although it is impossible to have leaders devoid of self-interest, it is equally impossible to have sustainable development devoid of selfless leaders.

The benefits of alignment around a set of unifying themes are huge. When aligned, we can:

• Avoid presiding over an evaporating realm. I watched self-centered leaders let this happen in my hometown of St. Louis, once the fourth-largest city in the country and now a dilapidating disaster.
• Take our focus off of the petty and try to develop more profits - in the full sense of that word - for everyone.
• Create a sense of urgency around important actions.
• Inspire many to find countless ways to create real value.

How can we hope to produce effective alignment in any community or organization riddled with conflicting interest groups, confusion about direction and misunderstandings about what constitutes good government and economic development?

Leaders have to: 

• Face reality.
• Leadership has to acknowledge the presence and severity of obstacles - political, economic, social, technological and structural - that prevent cohesion. Only then can it address and eliminate them.
• Find common themes. You can’t beat something with nothing. There has to be agreement on a central core, the vision and values that will pull the community or organization into the future. When there is agreement about the kind of community we want to become, we can defeat small-minded opposition.
• Welcome positive discontent. Leadership should welcome discontent, a real enemy to inertia and lethargy and friend of always hard-to-get growth, even as it sets guidelines for civil disagreement.
• Create safety nets. Leadership works hard to eliminate cheap shots at big-picture players. It never lets a special interest annihilate the general interest.
• Major on the major. Leadership faces a million challenges but stays focused on the things that can have significant impact on development.  We can’t have harmony if everyone sings the same note. Alignment is not
  about uniformity or squelching dissent, but rather about building a commonly accepted vision against which we can check our priceless, but rowdy diversity. It’s easy to talk about change because it makes us feel good. But it’s hard to actually change because changing is difficult.

Great leadership finds a way to pull people together around a few great, unifying ideas that will allow them to go beyond surviving change, and it creates an environment where change is welcomed and exploited for the common
good. Most communities and organizations don’t have this kind of leadership. But anything less isn’t leadership at all. It’s egotism with a very big title - and very little impact

James R. Lucas, Ph.D., P.E., is president and CEO of Luman International, a leadership development and cultural design firm. He can be reached at editor@clomedia. com.

Even in a difficult economic environment, companies more frequently are giving coaching to executives and high-potential employees to sharpen their skills and ensure the proper development of future leaders.

“Many companies have released numerous employees, including management layers, and they want to be sure that those remaining have the right capabilities for today’s and tomorrow’s business needs,” said Geralyn Burke
Gray, senior vice president with ClearRock.

“Businesses are also using coaching to ensure that employees who have been newly promoted to replace those no longer there have the required skills,” added Burke Gray.

“Due to cutbacks, companies may be lacking staff or expertise needed to coach newly promoted employees in proper management and interpersonal abilities. They also may want to bring in consultants who have more experience in developing new leaders and high potentials.”

Companies are more frequently using coaching as a means of gaining an edge over their competitors even in a difficult business environment by:

• Ensuring today’s leaders have the right skills to match the current business environment: “Managing during a  recession requires different capabilities than managing in better times. Leaders must be knowledgeable
  about various ways to keep employees motivated, and there are fewer monetary methods such as raises and bonuses to help them do this,” said Burke Gray.
• Aiding newly promoted employees become successful in their positions: “In a good economy, about one-third  of newly promoted employees fail within the first 18 months in their new jobs by being released, resigning or receiving a poor evaluation. This number tends to rise during a tough business environment, ” said Burke Gray. “Also, coaching is assisting the next generation of new leaders, who are replacing retiring baby boomers, to be successful in their new positions.”
• Helping develop the skills of high-potential employees: “Organizations are more frequently providing coaching to high-potential employees to assure that they acquire, at an earlier stage in their careers, qualities and abilities most commonly associated with upper-level managers. These management traits include strategic thinking, vision, creativity, innovation, decisiveness and motivating others,” said Burke Gray.
• Sharpening employees’ management styles and capabilities: “Businesses are using coaching to hone employees’ interpersonal skills, management techniques, and leadership skills and abilities,” said Burke Gray.
• Correcting substandard management behaviors of employees whose roles are critical to the organization: “Coaching helps companies correct the ineffective management behaviors of employees whose roles are essential, such as technical experts who may not be as proficient in management skills. These ineffective management behaviors include poor communication skills, or the inability to manage or develop direct reports, and can be especially counterproductive in a down economy,” said Burke Gray.

For more info: http://www.clearroc k.com

Sonja

These articles or links are in no way endorsed by Sonja Rooke or by “U”,  being posted purely for interest.