Further Thoughts on Leadership Strategy

by Victor Alatorre

Observations

The purpose of this blog entry is to explore my perception on what it takes to be a strategic leader in the area of information technology.  

Successful organizations will invest in people. An investment in human capital will enhance value. According to research, employees only engage 10 to 15 percent of the skills within their organization. Successful organizations allow individuals to expand the application of knowledge, skills and abilities. IMHO, the structure of the organization (like in the State) limits what individuals can do or should do within their job responsibilities. It was true 10 years ago, and it is true today. The added factor today is attrition and cost cutting measures dumping more and more responsibility on those strong enough to sustain the effort.

Organizations will be successful if they are capable of sustaining intellectual capital. We tend to connect intellectual capital with organizational knowledge which is (in itself) fueled by human capital.

In the last few years, those companies that have invested on innovative intellectual assets and human resources have had the most success (Apple, Facebook, Google, etc), however the economy has placed pressure on budgets associated with professional development and research and development.

The "Jack Welsh" strategy was the gold standard which included a philosophy of selecting the right people and allocating resources, while watching the talent rise up. 

Well, 20 years ago, Mr Welsh was regarded as the top manager of GE and one of the top leaders in corporate America. Jack was successful at learning the ways of his corporation and identifying talent and opportunities. He had a strong ability to see strategic value to mergers and acquisitions and to apply the GE way to cut the bottom “10 percenters” every year. This approach included the application of statistical theory to improve process (lean sigma), quality improvement through applied statistical analysis and the HR removal of those that lacked the motivation to improve shared value.

There is enough research covering the complexity of managing “knowledge workers”.  So we ask "What motivates technically savvy people?" Without getting too political, I believe our current employment structure and compensation plan fails to identify value and recognize talent for what is worth to the organization. It limits flexibility and opportunities for growth. I believe our current employment structure provides rigid structures that protects silos for better control and management.

The truth about managing knowledge workers goes beyond compensation and moves into the realm of opportunity, professional development and respect. The respect generated by the work knowledge workers do on daily basis. Respect takes many forms like: recognition an awareness of value provided, ability to get buy-in from administrators, the ability to spend time on new ideas or correct old ones, be allowed to learn new skills, etc.

Essential Leadership attributes were identified as:

• Technical Competence: Hopefully most people in IT have some technical skills, the article fails to identify the depth of technical skill required to be successful. I would add that ability to learn new technical issues is more important than established technical focus on area. All of us face obsolescence, so keeping up with technical skills is important.
• Conceptual skill: strategic thinking does not come easy to even upper managers. I have experienced it at many levels. They are too busy managing tangibles. I believe strategic thinking is problem solving on steroids for problems that have yet to be identified. Day dreaming, puzzle solving and skills that are not easily perceived
• Track Record: A track record is a history of performance or individual action. If the track record is good, then it can “perhaps” forecast future ability. A track record can deceive people into believing that if your track record as a technical specialist can translate into a positive track record as a manager.
• People Skills: As technical people, we tend to gravitate towards electronic, non verbal communications. I do believe that the promotion process favors extroverted technical people. Good looking extroverts is what fuels the lines of upper management promotion. It is also called presence.
• Taste: Lets call it “talent development”. The ability of a leader to provide professional development opportunities and challenges is important. Sometimes this goes against the very nature of a manager’s propensity to control and limit. I believe talent development to be the most important element of leadership development.
• Judgement: Technical people tend to be problem solvers, problem solvers tend to be analytical people, however decisions some times have to be made with limited information. This is where the gut instinct comes to mind. The ability for technical people to make sound decisions in a finite time allocation is important. Sometimes people avoid making decisions, specially obsolete technical managers.
• Character: I believe this is your value system which is a byproduct of family interaction, childhood and professional experience, and personality. Character is not easily identifiable by interviews or communication, It’s what people do that defines them, not speech. Character cannot be acquired.

I believe the most successful leadership factor has to be character. While we may agree with this statement, character is not something that can be put on a resume or easily identified during an job interview. Character is what drives individuals in an organization to do the right thing when others simply do not play by the same rules. Character is sometimes the missing element in management, so organizations suffer due to the flaws of those leaders driving them. Character is what you do for others when they have no power over you or your future.

In my interpretation, knowledge workers demand the following:

• Meaning or direction: A leader that knows and communicates where the organization is going, perhaps sometimes shares anxieties without sounding too negative.
• Trust in and from leader: Ability for managers to back off when needed and step up when an expectation of recognition is needed. Authentic interactions between management and process holders.
• Hope and optimism: Ability to provide a sense of accomplishment and optimism during a tough implementation and while providing a sense of progress. The energy to stay the course and motivate others for a common cause. 
• and Results: What is the bottom line’s value and perhaps lessons learned.

Passionate leaders are effective leaders if...

A strong point of view is perhaps one of the factors identified as an elements of a successful leader. However in my opinion POV may also be detrimental to the long term success of an organization. Steve Jobs had a strong POV regarding Apple’s product, however I wonder if many were capable to speak up against his opinion. There are various degrees of passion that without “checks and balances” can be catastrophic to an organization. So we have to ask ourselves the following question: What is the meaning of what we do, what is the value we provide and how do we measure it?

Generating Trust: candor, congruity, perhaps integrity.

We believe in humble leadership which is the ability to manage your ego when dealing with information flow and decision making. The author’s example states that “the face you use at home should be the same face you use at work”. I go further by saying that: Congruity is the correlation between what you say and what you do.

Another term we tend to use is “Candor”. Which is one of those that can cut both ways. It’s the ability to trust that the truth will not get you fired. Candor allows for truthful communication when issues arise that require the honest contribution of all parties involved. In my opinion candor can be problematic because it puts you at a disadvantage when issues arise. Candor works when all parties involved play by the same rules, but it can disadvantage those that show their end game.

Moral Compass:

It is defined as the ability of the individual to use resources and influence for the greater good of an organization. Moral compass is what is missing at many levels of our organization. It is what we need to have to be a long term successful leader. I conclude that organizations often elevate individuals with a moral compass deficits; I call them destructive achievers. In my opinion, while their reigns of “terror” are “sometimes” short lived but, they tend to have a long term delaying effect on progress.

More ideas later.....