Search The Blog

Need to Find a Job? Stop Looking So Hard

by Peter Bregman

Do you know anyone who tried for years to have a baby but couldn't? Then, after giving up, maybe after adopting, suddenly, surprisingly, got pregnant?

Or someone who was dying to be in a relationship? Dated all the time, but never met the right person. Then, after accepting he would be alone, started focusing on other things and, lo and behold, met someone and got married?

How about someone who lost her job? Maybe she spent the next year working on her resumé, perusing job sites, devoting all her energy to getting work. All to no avail. Then, after deciding to stop looking so hard, out of the blue, came a great job offer?

What is that? A karmic journey? A miracle? Statistical aberration? Pure random chance? Perhaps it never really happens; perhaps we remember those stories precisely because they are so unusual?

Or, perhaps, it's a really great strategy.

I just heard a story from a friend of mine. She knows a guy who's been out of a job for over a year. He spent the year working on his resumé and sending it out. He's on Internet job sites every day. He tries to meet with people when there's the opportunity but there aren't a lot of opportunities these days. And he's getting more and more depressed. It's hard to get out of bed but he does. He puts on a suit and tie, sits at his computer, and looks. Eventually, he figures, he'll find a job. I'm sure he's right.

But probably no time soon. The sad truth is that there aren't many jobs out there. And, just last week in the U.S., 200,000 more people started looking for them. Call me a pessimist. But I don't know a single company who is hiring. (I'm in New York, where things are particularly bad.) If you're the kind of person who likes to play the odds, then you'll admit that, chances are, you'll be out of a job for a while.

The same applies to companies who have lost clients, whose revenues are down, who are scrambling for business. It's a scary economic environment out there.

I was talking about this with a close friend of mine who holds a senior position at a large consulting firm. He sounded down--not depressed--but uninspired. We were commiserating about the environment when he said, "We're going after anything that's out there. This is not the time to be choosy. It's not fun."

But I do think there's another way to go through these times with less pain and more success. A way to increase your chances of getting that job. Of winning a new client. And maybe even enjoying it.

Give up.

Not completely. But mostly. Stop trying so hard. At most, spend 1-2 hours a day on it. Here are a few rules:

* Write your resume quickly and efficiently. Get the basic point across and then let it go. Same with a cover letter. Your resumé is not going to get you a job. If you're a company, the same holds true for your marketing materials. I'm sure they're already good enough.

* Don't spend time on job sites. It's highly unlikely, with all the people who are looking, that someone will hire someone they don't already know (or someone they know doesn't already know). Same goes for companies: don't respond to RFPs unless you already have the relationship.

* Spend all your hunting time with people: at lunch, on the phone, going for walks. Finding a job or new clients is all about human relationships.

If you're only going to spend 1-2 hours a day on this, what should you do with your other 12 hours? If you aren't going to spend your days looking for work, how will you find it?

Here's my recipe:

1. Make a list of all the things you love doing or things that intrigue you that you'd like to try doing. This is brainstorming so don't limit the list or judge it; write down everything you can think of.

2. Separate the activities you do with people from the activities you do alone. For example, gardening, reading, meditating, and writing are alone activities. Volunteering to run a fundraiser is with people.

3. Look at the activities you do alone and figure out if you can (and want to) do them in a way that includes other people. For example, join a garden club. Or a reading or meditation group. Or write something that other people read (a blog counts). If you can (and want to) make them activities that include other people, keep them on the list. If not, then cross them off the list.

4. Now's the fun part: Spend 90% of your time doing things you love (or have always wanted to try) with other people who also love doing those things. If possible, take a leadership role.

A good friend of mine has recently gotten involved in a church she adores. She loves all the pastors; she came to our house for dinner the other day and couldn't stop talking about them. So she met with them and offered to help in whatever way they needed. She's now leading a monthly strategy breakfast with the pastors and lay leaders of the church. I've never seen her so excited.

Another friend is training for a triathalon with a group of 15 others. He's in the best shape of his life and can't stop talking about it.

A company I know is doing pro bono work for charities and the government. Everyone working on those projects is energized.

Another company I know has given all their people writing time; they've been told to put their ideas on paper and get them out there. Somewhere. Anywhere.

Why does this work? Woody Allen once said that eighty percent of success is just showing up. When I first started my business, a great mentor of mine told me to join the boards of not-for-profits and do what I do best for them. Other board members will then see the results and want to hire my company to do the same for them and their companies. That's the obvious reason.

Here's the more subtle reason this works. Nobody wants to hire someone (or a company) who needs to be hired to survive. Depressed is not attractive. People want to hire energized people who are passionate and excited about what they're doing. Jobs come from being engaged in the world and building human connections.

And an even more subtle reason. If you're passionate about what you're doing, and you're doing it with other people who are passionate about what they're doing, then chances are the work you eventually find will be more in line with the stuff you love to do. And then . . . then your life changes (not to be too dramatic but it's true). No longer are you, like my consulting friend said, "going after anything that's out there." You're using this crisis as an opportunity to do work you love, at which you excel, with people you enjoy. You can't help but succeed.

Now, I know what you're thinking. You're thinking: that's a fine strategy if you're independently wealthy, getting that nice fat trust fund check every week to pay for your gym membership (or mortgage or kid's tuition). But what about the rest of us? Our inability to pay the monthly bills might actually intrude on our ability to "enjoy" unemployment. I know how scary it is to be without an income.

And that fear is what you have to manage because here's the kicker. It won't take longer to find a job even though you're spending less time looking. It'll take you less time.

Pursuing things you love doing with people you enjoy will position you better to get a job; other people will notice your commitment, passion, skill, and personality and they'll want to either hire you or help you get hired.

Also, actively pursuing other activities while looking for a job will make you more qualified for a job--because you'll end up a more interesting person. When you finally get that job interview, you'll be able to recount all the many things you've been doing (and will probably have a good time relating them) instead of saying that the only thing you've been doing for the past three years is looking (unsuccessfully so far) for a job.

The same holds true if you're a company looking for business. Spend your time doing things that will make you a more interesting company to hire when the business comes back.

And even if it took the same amount of time to find a job, wouldn't you rather spend your time doing things that are interesting with people you enjoy?

I just heard the story of a woman who decided to do work she didn't enjoy for a few years in order to make a lot of money. Three years later the company went bankrupt. That could happen to anyone. Bad luck. But here's what she said that I found the most depressing: "It's as though I didn't work for the last three years--it's all gone. And what's worse, I worked like a dog and hated it. I just wasted three years of my life."

Don't waste this time. The job search. The client search. Do it. But do it in a way that excites you. That teaches you new things. That introduces you to new people who see you at your natural, most excited, most powerful best. Use and develop your strengths. The things at which you excel. The things you love.

It's well known that people have a harder time getting pregnant when they're stressed about getting pregnant. And it's unlikely you'll get into a relationship if all you think about is getting into a relationship. The same holds true for finding a job (or, for a company, finding new business). However hard it may be, force yourself to do things you love with other people. Let the work find you.

What do you think?

Source: Harvard Business Blog

Read more...

Does Consumer Happiness= Time or Money Spent?

STANFORD GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS—"It’s Miller Time." "Live Richly." What do these vastly different marketing campaigns—one selling beer, the other financial services—have in common? They both focus on experiencing, rather than possessing, products. And according to a study by Stanford Graduate School of Business researchers, both are vastly more effective campaigns as a result.

"Because a person’s experience with a product tends to foster feelings of personal connection with it, referring to time typically leads to more favorable attitudes—and to more purchases," says Jennifer Aaker, the General Atlantic Professor of Marketing at Stanford Graduate School of Business.

Aaker and her coauthor, Cassie Mogilner, a PHD candidate in marketing on whose thesis the paper is based, analyzed 300 ads in Money, New Yorker, Cosmopolitan, and Rolling Stone and found that nearly half (48 percent) included a reference to time. "Clearly, marketers feel at some intuitive level that this time is important," says Aaker. Despite this, very little research has been done on whether the focus on time actually changes consumers' purchasing decisions or overall satisfaction with what they buy. Mogilner and Aaker hypothesized that marketers themselves weren’t aware of the value of stressing time. "What our work contributes is that they can trigger very different attitudes and behaviors just by mentioning time rather than money. We also show why this occurs," she says.

One explanation is that our relationship with time is much more personal than our relationship with money. "Ultimately, time is a more scarce resource—once it's gone, it's gone—and therefore more meaningful to us," says Mogilner. "How we spend our time says so much more about who we are than does how we spend our money."

Previous research had demonstrated that mentioning money makes people more self-sufficient, physically withdrawn, and less likely to help others. "On the other hand, when you refer to time, there's a big social component that integrates the products you use with the people in your life, which makes the product experience more meaningful and richer," says Mogilner.

In their first experiment the authors set up a lemonade stand—operated by two six-year olds, to make it appear authentic—for which they used three different signs. The first sign read "Spend a little time and enjoy C&D's lemonade"; the second one, "Spend a little money, and enjoy C&D's lemonade"; and the third, neutral one said simply, "Enjoy C&D's lemonade." Only one of the signs was displayed at a time. Customers were told they could pay between $1 and $3 for a cup of lemonade; the exact amount was up to them. After they made their purchase, they were surveyed to determine their attitude toward the lemonade.

The results were instructive: The sign stressing time attracted twice as many passersby—who were willing to pay almost twice as much—than when the money sign was displayed.

In a second experiment college students who owned iPods were either asked: "How much time have you spent on your iPod?" or "How much money have you spent on your iPod?" Students asked about time reported more favorable attitudes toward their iPods than those asked about money. "We were very surprised at how strong the differences were," says Aaker.

But Mogilner and Aaker were interested in investigating even more complex ramifications of the time-money relationship. One theory is that references to money will always be negative because consumers are reminded of the cost of acquiring a product rather than the pleasure of consuming it. To explore this possibility, Aaker and Mogilner surveyed attendees at an outdoor music concert in San Francisco. Although the concert itself was free, people had to wait in line for long periods of time to get decent seats. Aaker and Mogilner asked random individuals: "How much time will you have spent to see the concert today?" or "How much money will you have spent to see the concert today?" Even in cases where the real cost of the product was time rather than money, asking specifically about time increased participants' favorable attitudes toward the concert.

Even more strikingly, people who stood in line longer—who actually incurred a higher cost in terms of time spent—rated their satisfaction with the concert higher. "Even though waiting is presumably a bad thing, it somehow made people concentrate on the overall experience," says Aaker.

The exception to all this: When marketing products that consumers buy for prestige value, stressing money spent seems to be more effective. Designer jeans, expensive jewelry, and high-status cars all fall into this category. "With such 'prestige' purchases, consumers feel that possessing the products reflect important aspects of themselves, and get more satisfaction from merely owning the product rather than spending time with it," says Mogilner.

Mogilner embarked on this research because she was "passionate" about finding out what makes consumers happy, and how the products in their lives can contribute to their happiness. "We were largely interested in helping consumers make better buying decisions," says Mogilner.

Still, there were takeaways for businesses, too. From marketers' points of view, the study should be compelling because today they have less control over how their products are perceived by consumers. That control is shifting to the consumers themselves. "One study showed that user-generated ads were nine times more effective than marketer-generated ads," says Aaker. "Being aware of what brings meaning to the lives of potential customers of a product will help businesses with their marketing efforts."

Mogilner, who has accepted a faculty job at the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania, will be continuing her work on how companies can build innovative brands by focusing on improving the lives of consumers. Especially interested in the commercial uses of such resources as viral videos, social networks, and YouTube, Mogilner feels there is much that businesses don't understand about the power of these emerging technologies. "Marketers have a lot to learn about how they can positively influence the ways that their products improve the lives and happiness of their customers," she says.

—Alice LaPlante

Read more...

Wisdom of Warren Buffett: On Innovators, Imitators, and Idiots

By Bill Taylor

I'm not sure who said it first, but I agree with the sentiment: "A crisis is a terrible thing to waste." We're all struggling to make sense of the financial crisis that has spread around the world, to learn some lessons that will guide us as we go forward. One of my worries is that many of us will learn the wrong lessons -- specifically, that we will become too conservative and risk-averse, that we will learn to fear creativity rather than embrace it.

It's easy to portray the credit crunch as a case study of creativity run amok. Who's the genius who invented subprime loans? Weren't we all better off before the creation of a $500-trillion market in derivatives, hard-to-understand financial contracts that are at the root of so much of what's gone wrong? Shouldn't we declare, once and for all, that our fascination with "disruptive" technologies, "breakthrough" innovations, and financial "reengineering" does more harm than good?

Leave it to Warren Buffett, one of the world's richest men, to offer the most valuable advice on this score. In a recent hour-long television interview, Buffet gave a masterful course on how the world got into this financial mess.

At one point, his interviewer asked the question that is on all our minds: "Should wise people have known better?" Of course, they should have, Buffett replied, but there's a "natural progression" to how good new ideas go wrong. He called this progression the "three I's." First come the innovators, who see opportunities that others don't. Then come the imitators, who copy what the innovators have done. And then come the idiots, whose avarice undoes the very innovations they are trying to use to get rich.

The problem, in other words, isn't with innovation -- it's with the idiocy that follows. So how do we as individuals (not to mention as companies and societies) continue to embrace the value-creating upside of creativity while guarding against the value-destroying downsides of imitation? The answer, it seems to me, is about values--about always being able to distinguish between that which is smart and that which is expedient. And that takes discipline. Can you distinguish between a genuine innovation and a mindless imitation? Are you prepared to walk away from ideas that promise to make money, even if they make no sense?

It's not easy -- which is why so many of us fall prey to so many bad ideas. "People don't get smarter about things that get as basic as greed," Warren Buffett told his interviewer. "You can't stand to see your neighbor getting rich. You know you're smarter than he is, but he's doing all these [crazy] things, and he's getting rich...so pretty soon you start doing it."

Andrew Oswald, a professor of economics at the University of Warwick, has a more poetic way of making the same point. Oswald is a pioneer of a field that might be called "happiness economics" -- the study of the interplay between money and human satisfaction. His rigorous academic work confirms the advice that we hear in our churches and from our shrinks -- the relentless pursuit of wealth may fill your bank account, but it will leave you empty as a human being.

"The curse of humanity is that people feel compelled to look over their shoulders," Professor Warwick told my colleague Polly LaBarre a while back. "Happiness and self-esteem depend on rank and relative income. We are consumed by relativism. If your neighbor drives up in a new Lexus, and you're still driving the Toyota that you were perfectly satisfied with yesterday, you start to become dissatisfied."

So don't use the financial crisis as an excuse to stop taking chances or downsize your ambitions. But do use the crisis as an opportunity to take stock of what really matters -- and to stop looking over your shoulder.

Source: Harvard Blog

The Intelligent Investor: The Definitive Book on Value Investing. A Book of Practical Counsel (Revised Edition)



The Snowball: Warren Buffett and the Business of Life

Read more...

e-Commerce Report: Baby Essentials Succeed Where Pet Food Failed

By BOB TEDESCHI

IT sounds like a recipe from the Internet's cookbook for business disasters. Sell bulky commodity items at prices low enough to compete with grocery stores, and ship them free to consumers.

The recipe vaporized businesses like Pets.com, Webvan and other giants of the dot-com bust, but now it is being revived, successfully, in at least one category, baby supplies.

Thanks to improvements in shipping techniques and technologies, sites like Amazon.com and Diapers.com are selling huge quantities of diapers, baby wipes and formula, parenting's triple play. And although the companies are probably not making much money by doing so, they are bundling these staples with more profitable baby goods to fatten the bottom line.

It is a time-tested strategy of grocery stores, but for years e-tailers could not charge grocery store prices for diapers because shipping costs were too high. Now they can at least break even on such sales, said Marc Lore, chief executive of Diapers.com.

''When you're shipping diapers, wipes and formula, after shipping costs are taken out, there's really nothing left in the way of profits,'' said Mr. Lore, whose two children, for the record, are out of diapers. ''But you add in shampoo, lotions, feeding bottles and those things come out with 35 to 50 percent gross margins.''

As the company expanded its product selection to include more of those profitable items, Mr. Lore said, gross profit margins jumped to about 13 percent, from 4.6 percent in 2005. About 45 percent of the site's orders now include something other than diapers, wipes and formula.

The real trick to making the business work, though, is in how the company ships its less profitable goods. Rather than simply stuffing packages of diapers into a box that is roughly the right size for shipping, Diapers.com wrote software to analyze a customer's order and select from among 25 different boxes to avoid United Parcel Service's' charge for oversize shipping.

That approach, Mr. Lore said, saves $2 to $3 in shipping costs on a typical $100 order. The two Diapers.com warehouses were selected according to U.P.S. shipping zones, so 45 percent of the site's customers can be upgraded to free overnight shipping. That, Mr. Lore added, is an important element, because parents typically wait until they are nearly out of diapers before they plan another shopping trip or Internet order.

Revenues at Diapers.com, which is privately held and based in Montclair, N.J., jumped to $36 million last year from $11 million in 2006, Mr. Lore said, and are on pace to reach $84 million this year. The company recently raised $7 million from Bessemer Venture Partners, which backed Skype and BlueNile.com, among others.

That sum will come in handy as the company competes more vigorously with Amazon, which began selling diapers four years ago. Tom Furphy, an Amazon vice president who oversees the company's groceries division, would not comment on the profitability of diapers, but he said the economics swung in Amazon's favor when it sold enough diapers to buy them by the truckload.

Sales were further bolstered last year, when Amazon introduced its ''subscribe and save'' program, where customers receive regular shipments of goods at a 15 percent discount. ''It's an absolutely perfect fit for this,'' Mr. Furphy said.

Customers who sign up for the product subscription program, which covers nearly 20,000 items, typically request multiple products. Mr. Furphy would not disclose the number of subscribers, but he said the program ''has been a runaway success for us.''

As Diapers.com tries to compete with the e-commerce behemoth, it will also edge into the territory of an established leader of the online baby category, BabyCenter.com. The site, which is owned by Johnson & Johnson, earns money both through sales and advertising. It counts Diapers.com as one of its advertisers -- a logical choice, since BabyCenter's online store veers more toward upscale baby clothes and gear than supplies and consumable goods.

But Mr. Lore, of Diapers.com, said he would slowly build out the site's product selection, to the point where it could in future years carry strollers and other gear. Tina Sharkey, BabyCenter's chairwoman, said she was not concerned. Last year, consumers spent just under $2 billion on baby supplies online, she said, quoting statistics from Forrester Research. ''There's a lot to go around, and BabyCenter's store is not everything,'' Ms. Sharkey said.

If anything, the number of baby-related goods on the market is surging, as manufacturers try to capitalize on the growing tendency among consumers to spend lavishly on their new offspring. The origins of this trend are anyone's guess, but some analysts suggest that, as people have children later in life, they have more to spend on them. A cultural preoccupation with celebrity babies, some industry executives said, also helps.

Such a trend could seem headed for oblivion in a shrinking economy, but Ms. Sharkey believes not. ''You might see softening demand for the giant purchases, but it won't affect this market because these are the joys,'' she said. ''People are much more aware now of how short a time they have with their children at these young ages.''

That would bode well for the expansion hopes of Diapers.com, of course. In the meantime, though, Mr. Lore played down the broader implications of his company's success in selling otherwise unprofitable goods. Consumers should not, in other words, expect to see dog food appearing online with the words ''free shipping'' anywhere nearby.

Fifty pounds of dog food, he said, yields less than $5 in gross profit before shipping costs, whereas 50 pounds of diapers would yield $30. ''So the improvements we've made would certainly help,'' Mr. Lore said, ''but fundamentally, the Pets.com business model doesn't work.''

Source: New York Times



Read more...

In Downturn, China Exploits Path to Growth

By KEITH BRADSHER

GUANGZHOU, China — The global economic downturn, and efforts to reverse it, will probably make China an even stronger economic competitor than it was before the crisis.

China, the world’s third-largest economy behind the United States and Japan, had already become more assertive; now it is exploiting its unusual position as a country with piles of cash and a strong banking system, at a time when many countries have neither, to acquire natural resources and make new friends.

Last week, China’s prime minister, Wen Jiabao, even reminded Washington that as one of the United States’ biggest creditors, China expects Washington to safeguard its investment.

China’s leaders are turning economic crisis to competitive advantage, said economic analysts.

The country is using its nearly $600 billion economic stimulus package to make its companies better able to compete in markets at home and abroad, to retrain migrant workers on an immense scale and to rapidly expand subsidies for research and development.

Construction has already begun on new highways and rail lines that are likely to permanently reduce transportation costs.

And while American leaders struggle to revive lending — in the latest effort with a $15 billion program to help small businesses — Chinese banks lent more in the last three months than in the preceding 12 months.

“The recent tweaks to the stimulus package indicate a sharper focus on the long-term competitiveness of Chinese industry,” said Eswar S. Prasad, a former China division chief at the International Monetary Fund. “Higher expenditures on education and research and development, along with amounts already committed to infrastructure investment, will boost the economy’s productivity.”

The international economicslowdown is also doing some things that Chinese authorities had tried and failed to do for four years: slow inflation, reverse what had been an ever-growing dependence on exports and pop a real estate bubble before it could grow even bigger.

The recession in most of the large economies in the world is inflicting real pain here — causing a record plunge in Chinese exports, putting 20 million migrant workers from within China out of their jobs and raising the potential for increased and sustained social unrest. But as President Hu Jintao told the National People’s Congress last week, “Challenge and opportunity always come together — under certain conditions, one could be transformed into the other.”

To that end, Chinese companies are shopping for foreign businesses to acquire. The commerce ministry announced late Monday that it was greatly easing the government approval process for Chinese companies seeking permission to make foreign acquisitions.

The ministry is now leading its first mergers and acquisitions delegation of corporate executives to Europe; the executives are looking at companies in the automotive, textiles, food, energy, machinery, electronics and environmental protection sectors.

The government initiatives coincide with some immediate benefits of the slowdown for China. For instance, air freight and ocean shipping costs have plunged by as much as two-thirds since last summer as demand has fallen.

Blue-collar wages, which had doubled in four years in some coastal cities, have fallen for many workers this winter, causing personal pain but reviving China’s advantage in labor costs.

Unemployment has pushed down the piece rates that factories pay for each garment sewn or toy assembled. Overtime has practically disappeared.

Lao Shu-jen, a migrant worker from Jiangxi province who works at a blue jeans factory here, said that he earned $350 a month late last year but would be lucky to earn $220 a month this spring.

“There are a lot of blue jeans” piling up in the back of the factory with no sign of buyers, he said.

Highly qualified middle managers, in acutely short supply a year ago, are now widely available because of layoffs. They are likely to stay that way — although white-collar unemployment could pose a threat of social unrest. Limited job opportunities contributed to the Tiananmen Square protests 20 years ago.

Some jobs are still available now. Four days after a shoe factory closed here for lack of orders, laying off several hundred workers, there were four ads on the factory’s front gate from other shoe factories seeking to hire skilled workers.

Unskilled laborers face the greatest difficulty finding jobs. But with subsidies from Beijing, provincial governments have embarked on large-scale vocational training programs of the sort that the United States has discussed but not actually tried.

Guangdong province alone, here in southeastern China, is quadrupling its vocational training program this year to teach four million workers engaged in three-month or six-month programs.

The main comparable program in the United States, under the Workforce Investment Act, has been training fewer than 250,000 a year, although President Obama’s stimulus program provides funding that could double the number of American workers in training programs.

The Guangdong training programs are half in the classroom and half in the factory, usually the business that plans to employ the trainees. By increasing productivity, training programs can hold down corporate labor costs per unit of production for years to come.

China’s huge training programs may also help preserve social stability by keeping the unemployed off the streets, although Chinese officials deny that is their intention.

Multinationals are cutting back less in China than elsewhere — and some are even expanding.

Intel is shutting down semiconductor production lines sooner than previously planned at older, smaller operations in Malaysia and the Philippines as it opens a large, new factory in Chengdu in western China.

IMI Plc., the big British manufacturer of items as diverse as power plant valves and brewery equipment, has just announced an accelerated shift of operations to China, India and the Czech Republic, after cutting its global work force by 10 percent since December.

And Hon Hai, the 600,000-employee Taiwanese company that is one of the world’s largest contract manufacturers of products like the Apple iPhone and Nintendo Wii game console, has just increased employment by nearly 5 percent in China even as it cuts overall employment by 3 to 5 percent.

Yet China’s economy still has weaknesses. Little is being done to shift the economy away from a heavy reliance on capital spending and toward greater consumption. The social safety net of pensions, health care and education barely exists, so Chinese families save heavily.

Strict government policies on labor and the environment, intended to address serious shortfalls in both and imposed a year ago when China felt more confident of its economic strength, are prompting low-tech industries like toy manufacturing to move to other, less stringent countries.

Top labor officials insisted during the National People’s Congress that they would resist suggestions from some Chinese executives that the new standards be relaxed.

Source: New York Times

Read more...

How CMOs Should Function in a Recession

By John Quelch

Some good news for marketing heads: Chief Marketing Officers (CMOs) are holding on to their jobs longer. Spencer Stuart's annual survey of CMO tenure at the 100 most advertised brands in the USA reveals average time on the job has risen to 28.4 months from 26.8 months in 2007 and 23.2 months in 2006.

The popular interpretation of this data is that CMOs are aligning better with CEOs. The latter are no longer expecting instant rainmaking and the former have learnt to be humble. CMOs have learned not to pontificate about brand values before researching the issue, and they no longer fire the incumbent advertising agency the day after being appointed. The best CMOs stay low-key and aim to make the CEO, who is often from a non-marketing background, comfortable becoming the chief cheerleader for the brand.

The economic recession has, perhaps surprisingly, elevated the standing of the CMO. It hasn't always been this way, to be sure. So how can CMO's solidify this standing with the chief? Here are the four top marketing issues on which today's CEOs are looking to their CMOs for guidance:

Shifting consumer behavior. The recession has induced dramatic changes in consumer attitudes and behaviors in many categories. Companies need updated consumer research and revised approaches to customer segmentation. The CEO needs a CMO who understands the company's brands and consumers (and their comparative profitability) to recommend needed changes in customer targeting and brand messaging.

Price positioning. An economic downturn invariably increases customer price sensitivity. Marketers need to hit key retail price points, emphasize lower cost stripped-down or downsized versions of their products, and revamp their promotion calendars to maximize price competitiveness at the point-of-sale. While price and perceived value inevitably become more important to consumers, the core benefits of the brand must still be emphasized. On these matters, collaboration between the CMO and the CFO is critical.

Stretching marketing dollars. Recession demands that marketers come up with creative ways of doing more with less. Dollars might be shifted from television to cheaper radio advertising if it's important to maintain message frequency. Different versions of the same ad might be used in different countries rather than separate commercials being produced for each. An experienced CMO will know how to take a scalpel rather than a sledgehammer to the marketing budget.

Embracing digital. Rather than avoiding Internet advertising, now may be the time for many companies to experiment further and advocate more of their budgets to search advertising, banner advertising, or motivating user-generated content through a branded website. Only the CMO has the expertise in the C-suite to recommend how to proceed.

The best CMOs have both left brain and right brain proficiency. They must have both the analytical ability needed to focus on return for their spend, but also the creativity needed to position their brands in ways that are truly distinctive. In a recession, both skill sets are still needed but the first outweighs the second in importance.

The recession will have two important, lasting results for CMOs:

First, financial accountability of marketing is here to stay. Only in a few high-margin fashion-intensive categories will the shoot-from-the-hip right brain marketer survive.

Second, improved accountability requires CMOs to be financially literate, to understand the balance sheet as well as the income statement impacts of marketing initiatives. The result will be a new generation of CMOs who command more respect in the C-suite and hold their jobs longer as a result.

For more views on the role of the chief marketing officer, see John A. Quelch and Gail J. McGovern, "The Fall And Rise Of The CMO", Strategy + Business 37 (Winter 2004), pp. 44-51. An adapted version of this post appeared in Advertising Age, March 10, 2009, under the title "Why CMOs Are Gaining Ground In The Recesion."

John Quelch was one of ten marketing experts profiled in the 2007 book, Conversations with Marketing Masters, authored by Laura Mazur and Louella Miles. A professor at Harvard Business School since 1979, he is known worldwide for his research on global marketing, global branding and marketing communications.
John is a non-executive director of WPP Group plc, the world’s second largest marketing services company, and of Pepsi Bottling Group. He served previously as a director of Reebok International.


Source: Harvard Business Blog

Read more...

How to Use Fusion Marketing

Create a strategic alliance with a similar business and watch your business grow.
By Al Lautenslager

When I walked into the dry cleaners the other day to drop off my shirts, I found a $5-off coupon on the counter for the pizza shop two doors down. I decided I wanted pizza, so I walked down to the pizza shop, redeemed my coupon, and found a coupon on their counter for $5 off at the dry-cleaning place I was just at. These two establishments were sending traffic to each other; they had formed a strategic business alliance. In the world of Guerrilla Marketing, this is known as fusion marketing.

As entrepreneurs, we always think we have to do things alone, but its amazing the synergy available from collaborating or aligning with others. Fusion marketing can take your business to levels you never thought possible before now.

Those that are likely collaborators or fusion marketing alliances are power partners. A "power partner" is a business that has a similar target market as yours but doesn't really compete with you. Examples of this are an estate planning attorney and a life insurance salesperson; a graphic designer and a printer; a real estate professional and a mortgage broker; a wedding photographer and a caterer or disc jockey. I think when you look at these examples you start to get the idea. The number of power partners or fusion marketing partners is only limited by your imagination.

Fusion arrangements can come in many forms in addition to the coupon example above--you can join your mailing list with your partners and do a joint mailing; you can make joint sales calls; you can offer an incentive from your alliance partner for each purchase of your product and vice-versa for your partner.

I know a printer who offers a free pizza coupon or free ice cream coupon on the back page of their notepads. The pizza place and ice cream store get the benefit of the distribution of the notepads to the printing company's prospects, and the printing company gets the benefit of offering their prospects something for free.

Easy Steps to Setting Up Your Own Fusion Marketing Arrangement
Here are easy steps you can take to set up your own fusion marketing arrangements:

Step 1: Define your power partners.
A power partner is someone who has similar prospects as you and who could benefit from the same type of prospects, but isn't in the same business. Examples: landscaper/builder, realtor/mortgage broker, network marketer/entrepreneur, massage therapist/chiropractor.

Step 2: Figure out with your power partner what your offer will be.
Maybe the printer gives a two-for-one offer while the designer offers to design a logo along with the design piece of a direct-mail piece. Maybe the attorney offers a free consultation on wills while the insurance salesperson offers a tips list on avoiding probate tax. Maybe the massage therapist offers a free midday office visit for a massage break while the chiropractor offers a back adjustment. Figure out what joint offer makes sense.

Step 3: Write up a general letter of agreement.
This doesn't have to be a major-league legal document, but the one thing that hinders an alliance is lack of communication. This assures who does what and gets what. It can be a simple e-mail exchange.

Step 4: Package it up.
Write all the verbiage: the marketing copy, sales letter, press releases (if appropriate), e-mail letters, etc. Either have both businesses write it up and compare notes or have one write it and let the other approve. Be creative here. Be benefit-oriented. What's in it for the prospect?

Step 5: Combine mailing lists and communicate to both sets.
Don't worry about who has more or less--just combine them. When I put my list together with your list we both have a list much bigger than if we did it alone. You can do this with direct mail or e-mail; obviously e-mail is cheaper.

Step 6: Be responsive to any responses.
Fulfill offers; make it easy to sign up, to buy, to take the next step and keep track. Follow up and attention will convert prospects into paying customers. Share leads and conversions for future follow-up and future marketing.

Step 7: Follow up.
Both businesses should continue marketing to each of the converted people as follow-up marketing.

That's all there really is to it. It's a straight set of deliberate, planned-out steps, with a high degree of communication and execution. That's what all marketing is, and the more it's spelled out and planned out, the higher probability someone will act upon in. That's what all the marketing I get involved in does--this is the key to marketing. It's not going to happen overnight but with steps, plans and accountability, you'll increase your revenue. I prove it to myself every day, and I prove it to my clients.

Al Lautenslager is the "Guerrilla Marketing" coach at Entrepreneur.com and is an award-winning marketing and PR consultant and direct-mail promotion specialist. He's also the principle of Market For Profits, a Chicago-based marketing consulting firm.

Source: Entrepreneur.com

Read more...

Henry Ford : The Man Who Taught America To Drive

Henry Ford

Founder of Ford Motor Co.
Founded: 1903

I will build a motor car for the great multitude…it will be so low in price that no man will be unable to own one.”—Henry Ford

Henry Ford was nearly 40 when he founded Ford Motor Co. in 1903. At the time, “horseless carriages” were expensive toys available only to a wealthy few. Yet in just four decades, Ford’s innovative vision of mass production would not only produce the first reliable, affordable “automobile for the masses,” but would also spark a modern industrial revolution.

Ford’s fascination with gasoline-powered automobiles began in Detroit, where he worked as chief engineer for the Edison Illuminating Co. The automobile offered the promise of a bright new future…a future Ford wanted to part of. So in 1891, Ford began devoting his spare time to building what he called the “Quadricycle”—a crude contraption that consisted of two bicycles placed side by side, powered by a gasoline engine. After working on the Quadricycle for nearly a decade, Ford took Detroit lumber tycoon William H. Murphy for a ride in his hand-built automobile. By the time the ride was over, they were in business.

The Detroit Automobile Company opened in 1899 with Ford as superintendent in charge of production. But the venture only lasted a year. Ford could build a car, but he couldn’t build them fast enough to keep the company afloat. Undaunted, Ford hatched a new plan—to build a racer. Ford saw racing as a way to spread the word about his cars and his name. Through the notoriety generated by his racing success, Ford attracted the attention of the backers he needed to start Ford Motor Co. in June 1903.

Ford set up shop in a converted wagon factory, hired workers, then designed and produced the Model A, the first of which he sold to a Chicago dentist in July 1903. By 1904, more than 500 Model A’s had been sold.

While most other automakers were building luxury-laden automobiles for the wealthy, Ford had a different vision. His dream was to create an automobile that everyone could afford. The Model T made this dream a reality. Simpler, more reliable and cheaper to build than the Model A, the Model T—nicknamed the “Tin Lizzie”—went on sale in 1908 and was so successful within just a few months that Ford had to announce that the company couldn’t accept any more orders—the factory was already swamped. Ford had succeeded in making an automobile for the masses, but only to create a new challenge…how to build up production to satisfy demand. His solution? The moving assembly line.


Ford reasoned that if each worker remained in one assigned place and performed one specific task, they could build automobiles more quickly and efficiently. To test his theory, in August 1913, he dragged a chassis by rope and windlass across the floor of his Highland Park plant—and modern mass production was born. At peak efficiency, the old system had spit out a finished Model T in 12 and a half working hours. The new system cut that time by more than half. Ford refined and perfected the system, and within a year it took just 93 minutes to make a car.

Because of the more efficient production, Ford was able to cut hundreds of dollars off the price of his car. Cutting the price enabled Ford to achieve his two aims in life—to bring the pleasures of the automobile to as many people as possible, and to provide a large number of high-paying jobs.

But there was one problem Ford hadn’t foreseen. Doing the same task hour after hour, day after day quickly burned out his work force. The turnover rate became such a problem that the company had to hire close to 1,000 workers for every 100 jobs it hoped to fill. To solve the problem, Ford decided to pay his employees $5 per day—nearly twice the going rate. Workers flocked to Ford’s gates.

His labor problems solved, Ford turned his attention to another matter—the issue of who really controlled Ford Motor Co. Believing they were parasites who continually interfered with his plans, Ford bought out all his stockholders in 1919. Free to lead the company as he chose, Ford explored a number of different ventures. In addition to building tractors and single-passenger planes, Ford also operated an early mail route and the first regularly scheduled passenger flights. Undoubtedly the grandest of Ford’s ventures was The Rouge—a factory that was in itself one giant machine. Built on the Rouge River, the 1,096-acre plant was the largest industry complex of its time.

Throughout the 1920s, workers at The Rouge pumped out hundreds of thousands of Model T’s, but the marketplace was changing and Ford began to fall behind the times. Ford had met its first serious competitor—Chevrolet. While Ford had dedicated the past 20 years to producing only one model, Chevrolet had developed a counterstrategy of releasing a new, improved model every year. The counterstrategy worked, and Chevrolet soon surpassed Ford in sales. Chevrolet’s success proved that people wanted style, not just utility.

In this new era, Ford’s “Tin Lizzie” was hopelessly outdated. A change was needed, but it wouldn’t come without cost. In May 1927, Ford laid off thousands of workers while he figured out a way to get back into the marketplace. At the age of 64 he was starting over. With the release of a brand new Model A, Ford came roaring back to life. When the stock market crashed in October 1929, Ford Motor Co. was better off than most of its competitors. Thanks to the success of the new Model A, the company rode out the first two years of the Depression relatively untouched. Henry Ford even raised his workers’ wages while dropping the price of his automobile. But he could only hold out for so long.

In 1931, the Depression caught up with Ford. After three years on the market, Model A sales fell dramatically. Chevrolet, with its new six-cylinder engine, and a new model from Plymouth cut into Ford’s market share. Once again Ford was forced to shut down production and send workers home. What brought the workers back was yet another of Henry Ford’s inspirations—the Ford V-8. This innovative eight-cylinder engine put Ford back on top.

But those who went back to work for Ford found that working conditions had changed. The young, humanistic idealist had become a hardened industrialist who believed the average worker wouldn’t do a day’s work unless he or she was trapped and couldn’t get out of it. To ensure his workers put in a full day’s work, Ford created the Service Department, a foreman and a group of supervisors, many of whom were ex-cons and boxers, who ruled the plant through fear and coercion.

When World War II erupted, the government asked Ford to build the B-24 Liberator Bomber. Ford had suffered a stroke in 1941, and due to his rapidly deteriorating physical and mental health, supervision of the project fell largely to Ford’s only son, Edsel. Optimistic Ford spokespeople predicted that B-24s would roll out of the factory at the rate of one per hour. But by the end of 1942, only 56 planes had been built. Plagued by medical problems of his own, the project and the pressure proved to be too much for Edsel. In May 1943, 50-year-old Edsel Ford died. So at the age of 80, in spite of his clearly diminished capacities, Henry Ford once again took up the reigns of Ford Motor Co.

The news alarmed President Franklin D. Roosevelt. As the nation’s third-largest defense contractor, Ford was a major part of the war effort. Aware of Ford’s increasing mental incompetence, Roosevelt toyed with the idea of bringing in outside managers, or even nationalizing the plant. Instead, in August 1943, the Navy sent Ford’s 26-year-old grandson home in hopes that Henry Ford II could bring order to the chaos that Ford had become. For months Clara Ford tried to convince Henry to step down and let their grandson take over. But Ford held out. Finally, Edsel’s widow, Eleanor, threatened to sell her considerable holdings in the company if her son wasn’t immediately named president. Henry Ford relented, and in September 1945 the crown was passed to Henry Ford II.

After stepping down as president, Ford went into seclusion, appearing only occasionally at company events. The raging fire that him driven him for more than eight decades had died out. On an April evening in 1947, Ford laid his head on his wife’s shoulder and died of a cerebral hemorrhage at the age of 84. Tens of thousands of people lined up to view Henry Ford’s body as it lay in state. Some factories closed, while others shut down for a moment of silence. In all, it’s estimated that several million workers were involved in some kind of demonstration of sympathy for the man who had irrevocably changed their lives and taught America to drive.

Ford Motor Co. was the last major automaker to unionize. Initially, Henry Ford kept his workers from organizing by paying nearly twice the going rate, cutting the workday from 10 hours to eight hours and introducing the five-day workweek. But Ford couldn’t keep the United Autoworkers Union (UAW) out forever. When generosity failed, he turned to intimidation.

Ford formed the Service Department to ensure workers did their jobs and to keep the union out of his factory. Under the direction of Henry Bennett, a notorious figure with underworld connections, this group of ruthless thugs brutally repressed any attempt by UAW to organize Ford workers. In 1937, the Service Department mercilessly beat a group of union organizers attempting to pass out leaflets at the Ford factory. The beating left the union leaders battered, but undaunted. It took another four years of pushing before something broke.

On April 1, 1941, Andy Dewar, a worker in the Rouge River plant’s rolling mill, changed labor history at Ford. After an argument with a foreman over working conditions, Dewar began yelling “Strike! Strike!” The call echoed through the plant, and the entire rolling line walked out.

Ford was preparing to do whatever it took to keep the UAW out of his factory until his wife, Clara, demanded he settle with the union. Clara rarely interfered in Ford’s business dealings, but she was genuinely afraid that the situation would explode into real violence. She threatened to leave Henry if he didn’t end the strike. In May 1941, Ford Motor Co. became a union shop. The agreement led to a new era of labor relations in the automobile industry, as workers turned away from their dependence on Ford’s paternalism and fear of Bennett’s Service Department, and toward the union shop steward and the skills of UAW negotiators.

Henry Ford: The Getaway Car Of Choice

When Ford Motor Co.’s new V-8 hit the streets in 1932, it was an immediate hit with an American public who craved greater luxury and more power. With a top speed of more than 80 miles per hour, it was the fastest thing on four wheels. Not surprisingly, the speedy roadster quickly became a favorite of Depression-era bank robbers and gangsters.

John Dillinger was so impressed with the V-8’s power that he sent Henry Ford a letter which read, “Hello, old pal. You have a wonderful car. It’s a treat to drive one. Your slogan should be ‘Drive a Ford and watch the other cars fall behind you.’ I can make any other car take a Ford’s dust.”

Clyde Barrow of Bonnie and Clyde fame also felt compelled to compliment Ford on his achievement. “Even if my business hasn’t been strictly legal,” he wrote, “it don’t hurt anything to tell you what a fine car you got in the V-8.” Barrow remained loyal to Ford for the rest of his life. When he and Bonnie were shot to death in 1934, they were riding in a Ford V-8. In 1973, the bullet-riddled car sold at auction for $175,000—more than Hitler’s Mercedes Benz.

Source: Entrepreneur.com

Read more...

From Business Owner to Business Leader

Have you made the transition yet? With a few tips from this leadership expert, you can learn to become a great business leader.

By Patty Vogan

Long before you became an entrepreneur, I bet you remember saying to yourself, "One day, I'll own my own business!" People around the world have been saying those same words, some as early as 10 years old and others well into their 80s, with both excitement in their voice and a sparkle in their eye.

But when you thought of owning your own business, my guess is, your thoughts probably centered on the type of business you'd be starting. You dreamed of launching your own restaurant or construction company or taking over the family insurance company. You thought about how to make money and how to survive while ramping up. And how to run the business better and faster than your competition. Your first thoughts were probably not focused on the people that would be working for you or what type of leader you'd be.

At this point, you've most likely proven yourself to be a successful business owner...but have you proven yourself to be an effective leader?

Here's how you can find out. Take a few minutes and answer these questions for yourself:

  • Are you happy coming to work everyday and do you enjoy the people you hired to work with you?
  • Have you created a positive environment for yourself and your employees?
  • Do your employees feel comfortable coming to you with questions or problems? How do you know this for sure?
  • Have you developed the best focus for the business, yourself and your employees?
  • Do you really have the right people working in your business?

If you answered yes to most of these questions, then you've become an effective leader. But what if you answered no or you weren't sure? Don't feel bad--you're simply a business owner who needs to grow as a leader.

It's very easy to get caught up being the business owner and forget about the importance of being an effective leader in your business. Because those daily details can bog you down to the point where you forget that your employees need your time and attention--and need the guidance that only you, as the business's owner, can give them.

Think you could use a little help to become a better leader of people? Here are a few helpful hints to get you started:

  • The business's leader and employees know the strategic focus of the company and how to articulate it clearly and simply to anyone.
  • As the leader, you need to help your employees see how their position relates to your company's strategic focus and tell them how important they are--not just their position.
  • If you catch your employees doing something right, praise them for it. Recognition goes a long way toward building a loyal workforce.
  • Communicate with everyone in your company in a variety of ways on a regular basis, not just every now and then. For example, start holding weekly staff meetings, initiate individual conversations with your employees, start an internal newsletter or launch a monthly contest. There are dozens of ways to keep the lines of communication open.
  • Create a sense of pride in your employees by asking them for their opinions--when appropriate--when it comes to making changes in the company. Even if you don't always use their ideas, they'll really appreciate just being asked.
  • If you give bonuses for strong performance, try giving something more personal than cash. Know what your employees like to do in their time off with hobbies and interest. Then, instead of giving a $1,000 bonus (which your employees will probably use to pay bills and which is quickly forgotten), send your hiking hobbyist on a mountain trip for two in a beautiful cabin next to spectacular hiking trails. Or offer your shopaholic assistant a gift certificate to their favorite store. They'll remember these gestures much longer than a standard bonus and think of you fondly when they do.
  • Here's the last and perhaps most important tip: When it comes to your emotions, remember to respond to your employees rather than react to them. For instance, if an employee comes to you and says the numbers are off by $50,000 and you react by saying, "What? Are you crazy! How could that be??" that employee is most likely not going to want to share information with you next time around. But if you respond by saying, "Help me to understand how you arrived at that number," you'll exhibit genuine concern and let your employees know that you're there to help.

Remember, becoming a great leader is a learning process that never ends. Great leaders enjoy the challenges and the lessons learned--even when they're painful.

The type of leader you wish to become is entirely up to you. But if you want to learn to become a great leader, consider these additional tips:

  • Be aware of where you are today as a leader. Do you need to take action to improve your leadership skills?
  • Be open to critical self-assessment when it comes to your leadership skills.
  • Be willing to grow personally and professionally by learning new skills. Hire a business coach, find a mentor, read leadership books or sign up for a leadership class.

Source: Entrepreneur.com

Read more...

Foreign investment in China falls

Foreign investment in China fell in January and February as overseas companies were hit by the global recession, official figures have shown.

The amount of direct investment from abroad was $13.3bn (£9.5bn) - a drop of 26.2% from the same period a year ago.

Holidays over China's Lunar New Year mean the combined January and February figures are seen as a better indicator of the economy than monthly data.

The number of newly-established firms fell 13%, the commerce ministry said.

Foreign investment - which rose by 23.6% in 2008 to $92.4bn - has been one of the factors driving the rapid growth of China's economy.

But analysts say the figure has been under pressure in recent months amid the financial crisis - with further drop-offs in investment expected to contribute to the slowing pace of growth in China.

Energy deals

Separately, Beijing has said it will send more business missions abroad this year to look for investment opportunities.

"In the current situation, to increase investment exchanges with some countries is an important measure to stimulate the global economy," said commerce ministry spokesman Yao Jian.

The government says it signed contracts worth more than $13bn in the UK, Germany, Switzerland and Spain after a 200-member group of businesspeople and officials visited Europe last month.

Chinese firms have signed a flurry of energy and resource deals - including some to get oil from Russia, Venezuela and Brazil.

Meanwhile China's biggest aluminium producer has agreed to invest $19.5bn in Anglo-Australian miner Rio Tinto.

In another development, the Financial Times reported that Beijing had lost tens of billions of dollars of its reserves having begun investing in global equities, just before world markets collapsed last year.

The State Administration of Foreign Exchange (Safe), which manages about $2,000bn of reserves, began began putting money into global stocks in 2007, the paper reported.

Safe does not reveal details of its portfolio - but based on the performance of world markets, China's losses would exceed $80bn, the FT said.

Source: BBC

Read more...

10 Principles of the New Business Intelligence

Business intelligence--and its predecessor concepts decision support, executive information systems, and so forth--have been circulating for several decades in business. However, I don't think it's ever fully worked. What we've done is to throw data (often in the form of difficult-to-navigate data warehouses) and software tools at business users, and said "Go at it." That's simply been too hard. We used a lot of terms like "ad hoc queries" and "drill down," but it simply didn't happen very often.

I've argued for a while that organizations need to increase their focus on decision-making. In particular, they need to think again about the relationship between information and decision-making. I recently completed a study on this topic, with the sponsorship of IBM's Information Management business unit, in which I looked at 26 efforts to improve decision-making in organizations. I concluded the following ten things about how business intelligence (BI) needs to evolve:

1. Decisions are the unit of work to which BI initiatives should be applied.
2. Providing access to data and tools isn't enough if you want to ensure that decisions are actually improved.
3. If you're going to supply data to a decision-maker, it should be only what is needed to make the decision.
4. The relationship between information and decisions is a choice organizations can make--from "loosely coupled," which is what happens in traditional BI, to "automated," in which the decision is made through automation
davenport triangle.jpg5. "Loosely coupled" decision and information relationships are efficient to provision with information (hence many decisions can be supported), but don't often lead to better decisions.
6. The most interesting relationship involves "structured human" decisions, in which human beings still make the final decision, but the specific information used to make the decision is made available to the decision-maker in some enhanced fashion.
7. You can't really determine the value of BI or data warehousing unless they're linked to a particular initiative to improve decision-making. Otherwise, you'll have no idea how the information and tools are being used.
8. The more closely you want to link information and decisions, the more specific you have to get in focusing on a particular decision.
9. Efforts to create "one version of the truth" are useful in creating better decisions, but you can spend a lot of time and money on that goal for uncertain return unless you are very focused on the decisions to be made as a result.
10. Business intelligence results will increasingly be achieved by IT solutions that are specific to particular industries and decisions within them.

There was a story in this week's InformationWeek that I believe strongly supports this set of ideas. One quote is particular perspicacious:

BI historically has been about dashboards and scorecards developed for specific uses, says AMR Research analyst John Haggerty. But that's changing. "All of a sudden it's about integrated analytics within applications," he says. "The conversation is starting to shift to looking at information in the context of specific decisions and roles."

My sense is that this shift will be a major one, and both vendors and users of BI will be transformed by it. What do you think?

Tom Davenport

Tom Davenport holds the President’s Chair in Information Technology and Management at Babson College, where he also leads the Process Management and Working Knowledge Research Centers. His books and articles on business process reengineering, knowledge management, attention management, knowledge worker productivity, and analytical competition helped to establish each of those business ideas.

Read more...

A Leader's Journey

By: Pamela Kruger

Paul Wieand went on a quest for power and became one of the banking industry's youngest-ever CEOs. Then his world collapsed, and he went on a painful search for the real meaning of leadership. Now he helps other leaders on their journeys.

Paul Wieand looked at the letter of "resignation" he was about to sign, but the words weren't registering. How could they fire me? Only days before, he and his wife were in Paris, celebrating his imminent appointment as CEO of Independence Bancorp, a $2 billion, 1000-employee bank based outside Philadelphia. Just four years earlier, in 1981, he had become the bank's president -- an auspicious accomplishment, especially for someone who was only 33. Now, at 37, he was set to become one of the country's youngest big-company CEOs. "I was on top of the world," recalls Wieand. "Money, power, success: I had everything I wanted."

But when he returned from his celebratory vacation, his world collapsed. His dream had become a nightmare. The bank's retiring CEO and the corporation counsel were waiting in his office with a resignation letter. For the past six months, Wieand and the cochairman of the board -- "a good old boy in his 50s" -- had been battling over who would become the next CEO. But Wieand had finally bullied his rival into giving up. Or so he thought. It was like a page out of a John Grisham novel: The gentleman banker, who had shaken Wieand's hand and graciously admitted defeat, was secretly plotting against him. While Wieand was away, the executive lobbied the board and got himself voted in as CEO.

Shell-shocked, Wieand plummeted into a deep depression; his already slim five-foot-six-inch frame dropped in weight from 140 pounds to 125 pounds in three weeks. He had youth, connections, and a sterling job record, and he could live years without working: His 30-acre Bucks County estate was paid for, and his severance package included three years' pay, along with a company car, a secretary, and an office for a year. But he felt as if he'd lost everything -- especially himself. "Without my position, I didn't know who I was," says Wieand. "I lost my identity."

Over time, though, Wieand used this devastating setback to rediscover himself, to reinvent his professional life -- and to rethink his entire approach to leadership. He returned to graduate school, in psychology, on a mission to understand what he describes as "the unconscious, destructive, and unresolved emotional processes that drive the corporate world." Then, after earning a PhD, he set up an office on his Ottsville, Pennsylvania estate and founded the Center for Advanced Emotional Intelligence. AEI is billed as a leadership-development program for top executives and entrepreneurs. Its goal is to turn ultra-achievers into "learning leaders" -- people with enough self-knowledge and emotional security to remain true to their "authentic" selves and also to grow from criticism. "In a time when change is the only constant," says Wieand, "a leader's self-concept can't remain fixed. Leaders have to be willing to listen and to learn from feedback, or they -- and their company -- won't grow."

Like Daniel Goleman, the author of two best-selling books on emotional intelligence, Wieand argues that emotion -- more than intellectual ability -- drives our thinking, our decision making, and our interactions with others. To be an effective leader, you need to be able to read your emotions as well as those of the people around you. "How can you build a company around 'shared values' when the CEO doesn't know what his or her values are?" Wieand asks.

Unlike so many leadership programs, which involve a day or two of lectures and a few exercises, Wieand's yearlong program (which costs between $25,000 and $40,000) is intense and tailored to the individual. The result is a cross between psychoanalysis and a graduate seminar in philosophy. Clients are given a wide battery of psychological tests, and Wieand's partner, psychologist Jan Birchfield, 40, conducts 360-degree interviews with clients' subordinates, peers, and bosses to uncover any "blind spots." Clients also watch emotionally charged films, such as "Ordinary People," and then discuss their reactions to those films. In private sessions, Wieand challenges clients to face their true selves, asking them such provocative questions as "What are your secrets? What are you ashamed of?" According to Wieand, "People who come in here are used to hearing how brilliant they are. We have to knock them down, peg by peg, before we can build them back up."

Wieand believes that executives and entrepreneurs in midlife are the most resistant to that kind of soul-searching -- although they are usually the ones who need it most. In fact, he says, many paradoxical truths define the search for identity: Identity solidifies, and people become intolerant of change by the time they reach their mid-30s. Yet the world of work demands flexibility. To become successful, people build on their strengths and work around their shortcomings, but when they push their strengths too far, those strengths become weaknesses. Finally (and perhaps most difficult to reckon with), the more successful and powerful people become, the harder it is for them to remain authentic. "You start playing a role that the corporate culture and the general culture expect you to play," Wieand says. "And suddenly you're thinking that you've got it all figured out, when all you've got is hubris."

The questions that Admiral James Stockdale infamously posed seven years ago -- "Who am I? Why am I here?" -- are no joke at AEI. They form the core of the program. And many of AEI's clients -- including CEOs and top executives at major companies, as well as accomplished entrepreneurs -- say that answering those questions has changed their lives. John Matczak is a case in point: The 57-year-old founder and CEO of Pennfield Group, a $50 million aerospace conglomerate headquartered in Sellersville, Pennsylvania, sold off his most prized possessions after realizing that they owned him. Another executive, a top official at a major pharmaceutical firm, shared his deepest insecurity with his colleagues after reaching the gut-wrenching conclusion that his secret had been poisoning his relationships at work. "Going through this program makes you look in the mirror," says Matczak. "At times, that's really tough."

All these revelations take place in a 250-year-old stone barn, on Wieand's estate, which he bought from a psychiatrist during his banker days. ("Back then, I thought all shrinks were wackos," he laughs.) Wieand tries not to appear like "some namby-pamby intellectual" to his clients. Although he can rattle off quotations from existentialist philosophers and psychologists, he is quick to make his business credentials known. And mementos of his corporate life are prominently displayed in his office, along with old photos of him in his Brooks Brothers suit, surrounded by middle-aged bankers.

Moreover, unlike most psychologists, who present themselves to their patients as blank slates, Wieand makes a point of sharing his "war stories" with clients -- "the more painful the better," he says. "I want people to know that I've been hurt in the business world -- badly. Yet I obviously went through a transformation, going from president of a multibillion-dollar business, sitting in a big corner office, to sitting here, at my little desk."
Real Leaders Are Authentic

Wieand's program is based on lessons that he learned the hard way. He was raised in an apartment over his father's auto-body shop in Souderton, Pennsylvania. He had an undiagnosed learning disability, and, as a result, he grew up thinking he was dumb. When his seventh-grade math teacher berated him in front of the class, saying, "You're so stupid, Paul. You don't belong here," Wieand's worst fears were confirmed. He spent the rest of his high-school years racing cars and dreaming of someday getting rich. He ended up graduating in the bottom 5% of his high-school class.

To avoid the draft during the Vietnam War, he entered the Bethlehem Business School, a two-year college; then he enrolled at Dyke College, in Cleveland. During his junior year, he started dating a student at Case Western Reserve University. Her father was a Harvard PhD -- which spurred Wieand to get serious about his studies. "I knew that he thought I was an embarrassment," says Wieand. "I was determined to prove him, and anyone else who ever thought I was stupid, wrong." Wieand graduated on the dean's list, with nearly a 4.0 average in economics, and married his girlfriend.

Like most of the clients he sees today, he buried his childhood shame, only to have it haunt him as an adult. "When you reveal your secret, it begins to lose its power and eventually goes away," says Wieand. "But if you hide it, you develop defenses, and you overcompensate." In Wieand's case, he became "obsessed" with achievement -- and intolerant of those he considered to be beneath him.

Discovering that he had an aptitude for finance, Wieand pushed that strength to the limit: Within 10 years, he worked his way up from commercial-credit analyst to president of Bucks County Bank, a small but prestigious institution in Perkasie, Pennsylvania, while earning his MBA at night and becoming an adjunct professor in Drexel's Executive MBA program.

After becoming president of the bank, he masterminded mergers with two other banks, tripling its size and turning it into a major regional institution. "I had been watching the deregulation of the banking industry," Wieand remembers. "The industry was going through a massive consolidation. Either we would get gobbled up, or we would do the gobbling."

Wieand named the holding company Independence Bancorp and modeled the organization after the U.S. federal banking system. The model worked. A year after the merger, in a study of similar-size banks, Independence ranked third in the nation in performance on assets. But, like so many of the executives he would later counsel, Wieand pushed his strengths too far. Eventually, his financial savvy became his liability. Instead of cultivating the older, established bankers who were stewards of the institutions that Wieand had acquired, he tried to force them out. He froze their salaries, took away their responsibilities, and installed a layer of young MBAs above them. He refused to defer to the board of directors, most of whom he saw as "country-clubbers who golfed while I ran the place." Even today, Wieand replays many incidents in his mind, wishing that he could turn back the clock.

By the time Wieand was forced to resign in June 1985, he had alienated all but two members of the board. Pushing for the job of CEO, when his rival had more seniority and lots more allies, was his final, fatal error. "If I had listened, I would have heard people warning me to slow down," Wieand says. "But I started thinking that I knew better than everyone else."

That's another of Wieand's paradoxical laws of human nature: Intoxicated with their success, executives start to define themselves by their job title, rather than by who they are inside. They lose touch with their emotions, and they become insensitive to how they affect others and intolerant of others' weaknesses. "If you idealize your role -- which is what happens to most of the people I see -- you fool yourself about what people really think of you," Wieand says. "You don't know when or why you get defensive. You don't get open and honest feedback from people. There's no reality testing."

Wieand says that when he was fired, he found himself in a "free fall." He went from feeling "almost like a king" to feeling like that "stupid, worthless" little boy who couldn't handle seventh-grade math. "Back then, Paul didn't look at his job as just an experience," says Jay Sidhu, 47, who had worked with Wieand at Independence and who is now the CEO of Sovereign Bank. "The job was him; it was what made him feel powerful."

Six months after leaving Independence, Wieand was hired by the federal government to turn around a failing savings-and-loan, Penn Savings Bank. As CEO and president, Wieand immediately took the bank public and renamed it Sovereign (sovereignty is another word for independence). Then he hired Sidhu, his most talented colleague at Independence, and acquired Yardley Savings and Loan, a thrift in Independence's backyard. "I was laughing at the guys at Independence," Wieand says. "I wanted to stick it to the people who screwed me."

By 1989, Sovereign had $1.5 billion in assets and was heralded as a model turnaround. Wieand was earning more than ever before, but he felt as if he were sleepwalking through work. At night, he took refuge in books -- some written by management gurus like Peter Drucker, but mostly books written by existential psychologists like Rollo May. "I wanted to know why running the bank was easy intellectually, but hard emotionally," says Wieand.

So, when a shrewd multimillionaire turkey farmer, who later would plot to sell the thrift, joined the board and declared war on him, Wieand -- then only 41 -- decided to retire. He took his five- year $1 million golden parachute, which included stock options and a generous pension, and, within a month, began graduate school at Temple University, in Philadelphia. While pursuing his PhD, Wieand began coaching executives part-time. But his leadership-development program didn't really begin to take shape until he started working with acute schizophrenics during his residency at Trenton Psychiatric Hospital.

At Trenton, he formed a therapy group for middle-aged patients who had IQs of 150 or more. "How come people with off-the-chart IQs couldn't handle the simplest social interactions?" Wieand wanted to know. By working in "the extremes of human nature," he thought he might gain insights into the "insanity" that he saw in the corporate world.

Working with his "mensa group," Wieand developed his self-revealing style with patients and found that it produced powerful results. ("Where is the dignity and respect in asking people about their intimate secrets, when you're not sharing your own?" he asks.) Wieand saw that by sharing his story and by answering honestly the most personal of questions, he could get even the most antisocial patients -- who included a brilliant mathematician and the son of a Nobel laureate -- to respond. "Just getting these patients to show up for a group was a miracle," says Jan Birchfield, who also worked at Trenton Hospital. "Paul got them communicating."

Wieand also made an important discovery that would lead to his notion of the learning leader. "I saw that everyone -- whether they're patients in a psych ward or executives in a corporation -- wants the same things in life: to be recognized, to be cared for, and to be given an opportunity to grow. And, if you're authentic and trustful, people will realize that, and they'll respond. Authenticity is contagious." After all, he adds, "If creating an atmosphere of trust and authenticity can get acute schizophrenics to work together, think of what presumably less-fragile people can do."

The Leadership Emotion
Wieand opened AEI in the summer of 1995. He knew his program would have to be more wide-ranging and demanding than other leadership programs. So he drew on the research of Al Siebert, a psychologist who had been a paratrooper in the Korean War. In his studies, Siebert found that "extreme and torturous conditions" strengthen a "small fraction" of people. These survivor types have complex, paradoxical personalities that defy simple categories. They can grow and learn, but they also maintain their core personality. To Wieand, leaders need that type of personality. Real leaders, he observed, were serious and playful, self-confident and self-critical, strong and vulnerable, intuitive and logical.

He also drew on recent findings from neuroscience, which showed that the brain's limbic system, which governs feelings and impulses, is stronger and more stubborn than the neocortex, which controls logic. "That's why you can't take your staff white-water rafting and expect to return with a new, happy team," says Wieand. "The limbic system will override that intellectual memory in a short period of time. It can hijack almost all rational thought."

So Wieand tries to change not just how executives think but also how they process their emotions. One part of his program involves watching films -- first at home, with a spouse or a friend, and then with Wieand. "With a film," he says, "you can show people a vision about emotional identity that they'll never forget."

To prove his point, Wieand pops in a video of "Ordinary People" and fast-forwards to the film's climactic scene, in which Donald Sutherland's character tearfully tells his picture-perfect wife, played by Mary Tyler Moore, that he isn't sure he loves her anymore. Rather than have the difficult conversation that's needed to salvage the marriage, the wife -- who can't handle messy emotions -- walks out on her family. "If you're watching this with your spouse, who then says, 'That's you' -- well, that's powerful," says Wieand. "And then you come to see me, and we talk about how you feel about all of the characters. Which one did you identify with? What would happen if a person like that were running your company? With a film, you can begin to experience how you process your emotions."

From the start, Wieand found that his program could produces "aha" experiences -- even in self-aware executives. His first client at AEI, Jay Sidhu, admits that he was taken aback when he learned how his staff viewed him. An avid reader of Tom Peters, Sidhu was determined to create "one of the best companies in America" and was committed to running a team-driven, inclusive organization. So why did his staff find him intimidating? "People who come always think they're a people person. They get a shock when they get the results of their 360-degree evaluations," says Wieand. "I remember Jay asking me, 'Isn't there one person who sees it the way I do?' "

Then Wieand had Sidhu read an article by Peter Drucker about communication and then watch "The Browning Version," starring Albert Finney. During the movie's stirring farewell speech, in which a fiercely intellectual scholar, played by Finney, confesses that he wished he had been more "human," Sidhu had an epiphany. "Paul and I were discussing what Drucker says about communication," says Sidhu. "Communication is in the mind of the recipient: You're just making noise if the other person doesn't hear you. And when I saw this movie, I suddenly saw the power of communicating on an emotional level, without putting up a front."

Sidhu had been holding weekly meetings with about a dozen staffers in his 4,500-person organization, inviting anyone from tellers to senior executives to attend. But in their evaluations, staffers complained that it put them off when he called on them in those meetings. That's why Sidhu now begins each meeting by speaking candidly -- and, at times, emotionally -- about what he has been dealing with in the bank that week. And he's found that his candor has sparked true dialogue. "Everybody talks about the importance of building a family atmosphere within a company, but that means nothing unless you sit and talk on an emotional level." Sidhu says.

Some aspects of a personality cannot be changed, however. And Wieand pushes clients to take a close look at themselves and to accept their limitations. When John Matczak came to see Wieand, his company's sales growth had been slow for five years. Matczak wanted to grow his business from $50 million to $150 million in annual revenues. Discovering what was preventing Matczak from achieving that goal didn't take long. For those five years, Matczak had invested heavily in status symbols: a Lear jet, two oceanfront vacation homes, and a 60-foot yacht. And his sales staff had a high turnover rate -- 35% a year -- primarily because he was so domineering and did so much micromanaging

Wieand knew that, with coaching, Matczak could change his weakness for "toys." (And he was right: Matczak ended up selling the homes, the yacht, and the Lear jet.) But, at 57, Matczak was unlikely to change his overcontrolling personality, nor was he the type of person who could keep many balls in the air -- a skill that's essential to running the affairs of a multimillion-dollar company. So Wieand pushed Matczak to do what so few mega-entrepreneurs have done: surround himself with people who had the management skills that he lacked. This year, Matczak has promoted his star employee, a 35-year-old master manager, to president and has given this manager equity. Matczak has also hired a vice president to oversee sales and marketing. "When you're an entrepreneur, you think you know everything already," he says. "I'm nervous about letting go. But I know that it's what I've got to do to grow the company."

A few of Wieand's clients are not as eager for such revelations. They have been sent to Wieand by their superiors, and they come reluctantly. The division president of a pharmaceutical giant, for instance, was sent to Wieand last year because of his arrogance and aggressiveness with his peers. Although his need to prove his mettle had gotten him into the "inner-inner circle," his superiors wanted to soften that drive now that he had become a peer.

But the 47-year-old executive fought Wieand -- attempting to intimidate him, as he had already done with his colleagues. Just as Wieand had used his financial skill to prove that he wasn't stupid, so this client was using aggression to hide a vulnerability. (Says the executive: "I knew I had a problem, but I didn't know what to do about it or where it stemmed from.") It wasn't until midway through the program that Wieand and his client discovered what that vulnerability was. The client was filling out a "life inventory" form when he came to the question "What are your secrets?" And then he just blurted out that he hadn't graduated from college.

To most people, that revelation was hardly earth-shattering. But this executive, surrounded by MDs and PhDs from Ivy League schools, had always felt inadequate. Although he had worked at the company for 18 years and had always been truthful on his personnel records, he had avoided discussing his education with his colleagues. "It just came to me," the executive says. "Perhaps I knew it all along." In an effort to strip the secret of its power, he disclosed it to a few of his colleagues, including the president of the company, who then proceeded to confess his own sense of insecurity. "It's amazing," says this client of Wieand's. "When you disarm yourself, you disarm others as well."

These days, this executive is debating whether to accept another promotion, which would require relocating his family, living apart from them, and seeing them only on holidays and occasionally on weekends. Like so many in Wieand's program, he has found that being "authentic" has forced him to reevaluate not just his work but also his personal life. "Before, I just would have taken the job and let my family deal with the consequences," he says. "Part of what I learned from Paul is to look at how you affect other people."

This year, he and Sidhu each hired Wieand to create a special leadership program that would help their top managers become more authentic leaders. "If you are aware of your weaknesses and are constantly learning, your potential is virtually limitless," Sidhu says. "You can build something that will be a legacy."

Such talk is encouraging to Wieand, who feels certain that a movement is slowly taking hold inside boardrooms. More and more companies are seeing "that the old style of ruling by fear doesn't work anymore. The good people will leave." He is haunted by the pain he caused, and he hopes that his work serves as a kind of penance. "There were so many people whom I hurt at Independence. I am still embarrassed about who I was then," he says. He pauses dramatically. "Being a leader is a hard job -- maybe the hardest job there is," he says. "But once you've chosen it, you have a moral obligation to be your best self."

Sidebar: Why Is It So Hard to Be Yourself?

Strong leadership begins with a clear identity -- knowing who you are and what your values are. But, according to Paul Wieand, many high achievers have distorted self-images: They either think too much of themselves, or they simply don't know who they are. As a result, they're seen as weak, phony, or untrustworthy. Why is it so hard for leaders to be themselves? Wieand offers three explanations.

Leaders resist soul-searching precisely when they need it the most. Psychological research has shown that by the time you reach your mid-30s, your identity solidifies, making change intolerable, Wieand says. Yet the new world of work demands that leaders learn and grow constantly. "In today's free-flowing team environment, leaders have to have a strong core -- values that they remain true to -- but they also have to be adaptive," says Wieand. To achieve a flexible-yet-resilient identity, he adds, you have to be willing to look inward.

At some point, strengths become liabilities. Wieand tells the story of a former client of his who, because he was a "nice guy" and a financial whiz, became CFO of his company. But, as CFO, he needed to make tough decisions. When being a good guy didn't achieve results, he just kept trying harder to be nice, and suddenly he was seen as too nice. "Most of us have become successful by developing a set of strengths and working around our weaknesses, but inevitably we push these strengths too far, and they become weaknesses," says Wieand.

Leaders tend to define themselves by their work, rather than by who they are. Intoxicated by success, says Wieand, people begin to think of themselves only in terms of their role at work. Thus they lose sight of their weaknesses, they don't tolerate criticism, and eventually they lose their ethics -- doing whatever seems expedient. "To be a great leader, you not only need a deep knowledge of yourself; you also need to accept your limitations," Wieand says. "If you do that, you can't lose."
Sidebar: What Are You Doing Here?

According to Paul Wieand, real leadership starts with authenticity. But how do "authentic" leaders -- people who lead with empathy and values, and without manipulation -- perform on the job? He outlines three guiding principles of authentic leadership.

Surround yourself with people who are at least as talented as you are. "You can grow and stretch some aspects of yourself," Wieand says, "but there will always be some parts of your personality that you will never overcome, no matter how hard you work at changing them." Authentic leaders accept their limitations and hire people who have the strengths that they lack. Equally important: These leaders invite their staff to speak candidly to them -- and the more brutal the candor, the better. "It's only human to be self-deceptive," Wieand says. "But if you have the emotional courage to pay attention to what stings the most, you'll know where your blind spots are."

Communicate with emotion as well as with logic. According to Wieand, the latest research in neuroscience shows that the brain's limbic system, which controls our basic emotions and impulses, is more powerful than the brain's neocortex, which governs our intellect. That's the reason why emotional memories often override logic: The limbic system processes stimuli and prompts us to react long before the cortex has even begun to filter that stimuli.

As a result, if you establish an emotional connection with your staff by exposing your vulnerabilities, you will find that people will respond much more strongly than they will if you appeal to their intellect. When a client of Wieand's, who was known for his fierce competitive spirit, confessed his failings to 25 of his top managers, he prompted a wave of confessions from them. Not only did his candor help strengthen the bonds he had with those managers; it also helped spread authenticity throughout the organization. "Those 25 people became more open with their staff," says Wieand.

Make sure your private conversations mirror your public ones. When Wieand was president of Independence Bancorp, he would make ingratiating speeches to the board, thanking members for their support, even as he was saying something different to his colleagues. "The board members knew that I was lying. So they learned to distrust me, and eventually that cost me my job," says Wieand. A sure way to seem inauthentic is to vary your message according to your audience. "It's only a matter of time," Wieand says, "before everyone sees through you."

Source: Fast Company

Read more...

US SEARCH - Access Billions of Records New
Access Public Records
First Name Last Name
City State Age

About This Blog

This blog is dedicated to provide information, article or journal related to business and management.

Can't find, search it here

Latest Movie/TV

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP