Skip to main content

CEOs again...

The Wall Street Journal published a thought provoking piece a couple of days ago by Ray Fisman and Tim Sullivan In Defence of the CEO which rang many bells for me, after my recent blog CEOs - Jekyll or Hyde?

Two things particularly caught my eye.

On my comments and distinction between celebrity and celebrated CEOs, Ulrike Melmendier of the University of California, Berkeley and UCLA's Geoff Tate 2009 study found that companies performed poorly after their leaders were voted 'CEO of the Year', because of the distractions that came with the fame, like writing a book and hobnobbing at Davos. A truly great CEO cannot be distracted, she must remain a great intelligence gatherer, a great communicator and ultimately a great decider, and meetings are one of her most important tools. 

Second, the article points to Harvard's Michael Porter and Nitin Nohria's view of Style 1 and Style 2 distinctions of CEO behaviours. In their time-use study of 354 Indian CEOs - still work in progress, the researchers collected detailed information on the nature of CEOs' meetings, including who attended. Two dominant management style emerged. 'Style 1' leaders, in their taxonomy, spend most of their time meeting with employees; they also tend to hold larger meetings and to include people from a wider set of departments within the organization. 'Style 2' CEOs are more apt to spend their time alone, in one-to-one interaction, and outside rather than inside the firm.

This points to the all-too-important issue of how CEOs engage and in doing so, extract not only data and information but a sense of what her stakeholders and staff believe are priorities for the organisations. Add to this the instinct we expect our CEOs to have, and we can see the ways successful organisation sustain their performance and leadership.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Panic and the absence of leadership

I often borrow a line commonly used in crime movies when I see yet another leadership organisation fall from grace: "You could have done this the easy way, but you chose to do it the hard way". Oxfam  was a hitherto admired institution, having done impressive work around the world for more than 75 years, respected for its engagement with donors big and small, its courage in working in war- and disaster-torn regions, and its commitment to equality and fairness. The Haiti scandal has rocked it to its core, putting into question its ability to continue its operations, as governments are rethinking funding levels, donors withdrawing sponsorship and customers pulling out of their shops. In other words, it is losing its licence to operate. There are so many lessons that can be learned from brands which fail to protect their culture, vision and reputation. United Airlines CEO's response to the treatment of one of its passengers on a flight, Bell Pottinger's colla
Post a Comment
Read more

Authenticity and public gaffs

Tari's LinkedIn post 8 November 2018 Interesting that in this otherwise fascinating article, the word 'authenticity' only came up once. If you're a boss of any sort (politics or business), your first step should be to get in touch with your own authenticity and check how aligned this is with a) the organisation you lead or represent, b) expectations of your stakeholders, and c) the prevailing zeitgeist. Yes, presentation and avoiding-gaffs training can help but better still, get the thinking, the emotions and the behaviours right. The bonus is that you'll feel less nervous about making a gaff when out and about in public because you're not second-guessing what might constitute a gaff. There's a bonus in doing this: you get to lead your organisation better and your staff also get to live a culture of authenticity
Post a Comment
Read more

From change and transformation to sustainability

"...only if the lightbulb wants to change..." Like or hate it, Brexit will bring enormous change for businesses through transformed regulation, trade policies, labour laws, new financial management, and many other challenges.  "...while Britain and Europe are negotiating over what happens to European Union citizens who now work in Britain (as well as Britons who work in other European Union countries), no-one is sure how these ralks will go..." ( NYT Sept 18, 2017 ). Many employees' lives will be transformed in deeply personal ways. They may need to move to a different country, they may be working under a different regime or leadership. Their hours of work, pay scales and contractual obligations may change, their reporting lines and accountability shifted, their place of work reorganised. They may need to get used to a new corporate culture.  Sounds familiar? Any change in an organisation needs to be embraced, lived and supported by its most precio
Post a Comment
Read more