People. Performance. Profit.
In research we published last year, over 80% of senior executives we spoke to claimed that they had, in their recent working life, been dissatisfied with the outcomes of a cross functional project or had identified a failure to deliver on project objectives at least once. In a separate piece of research, published in his PhD, Dr Chris Mason of Mindshop separately identified that as few as 30% of organisational change initiatives succeed. From different sources, the two studies say the same thing: change is difficult! Continue reading
Managing and driving change in an organisation can be a challenge even for seasoned leaders – only about a third of change initiatives succeed. We’ve recently gained access to extensive research that tells us why some organizations don’t progress but also why and how others succeed.
One of the things that what we do at the start of any advisory engagement is evaluate an organizations readiness to change as it’s one of the key factors influencing change.
Are you having trouble implementing change? Give us a call on 03 8617 8120 or drop us a line at email@example.com.
Back in 2009 there was a research company in the United States that noticed certain sales people who, despite there being no money, no business and no liquidity in the market, were still selling effectively. So they set out to identify the solution to selling in bad times. Little did they know that their efforts would lead to an evolution in best practice for business to business sales activities.
Some of their findings might not surprise you, in fact, you might actually recognise yourself or some of your colleagues; but there are a few that are sure to change your perspective on selling…check out the video!
We’ve created a learning and development program ensuing from our recent successes with our clients. We would love to talk to you about what we know and how we can leverage our knowledge and development program to give you an advantage.
Call us on +61 3 8617 8130 or send us an email for more information or to get started.
Hardly a week, maybe even a day goes by when I am not confronted by bad manners. Yesterday, it was the three motorists I was courteous to and yet my gestures were not acknowledged: the guy I stopped for who was signalling to enter traffic and was left with enough space by me to complete a U turn across two lanes who sped off as I hadn’t existed, the young driver racing up behind cyclists in front and to my left whom I slowed for out of courtesy and safety’s sake who did the same, to name just two.
Not expecting a response from the media, I’d like people to see my views on this matter, so I have posted below an email sent Channel 7 this morning, I will also post it on LinkedIn – some people should not have the privilege of broadcasting.
“Do we have a problem?” is the kind of relationship tipping point question that one often sees in feature films – by the time it has been uttered, not only are we aware that there is a problem but which protagonist is responsible for it, The rest of the drama is then played out against themes of discovery, consequences, recovery and sometimes redemption.
What does this have to do with people, performance management or the working environment? You might ask. I have been wondering that too on both macro and micro levels and also wondering how my micro and macro observations are synergistic.
On the macro level, we are in the midst of an election campaign. If I take themes at face value (which is something of an oxymoron in an election campaign) then we have one side saying we’ll produce our numbers when we have detailed our plan and the other seemingly completely oblivious to its own financial profligacy but saying “trust us”.
In May 2012, Harvard Business Review posted an article, “The Rise of the Executive Supertemp”. It told of how, following the GFC fallout, many corporate executives in the United States had discovered that they could make valuable contributions to a variety of businesses based on their expertise and experience, not as consultants but as short term “situational managers” (my italics).
The experience of these executives, in a country where ten days annual leave is the norm was that they were energised, engaged, and capable of delivering results, especially change or turnaround results, quickly in assignments that lasted between 3 months and 12 months. They spoke of how time out after each assignment, generally facilitated by rates higher than salaries but lower than serious management consultants, allowed them to recharge their batteries, undertake some professional updating and personal development which allowed them to go into each new assignment in better shape than the last one they started.
It has been a remarkable week in Australian politics. We have seen a former Prime Minister sworn in as our new Prime Minister after an insidious period of internal de-stabilisation. Without getting into the discussion about who has exhibited the most leadership, authenticity, loyalty or opportunism I have been reflecting on how this draws parallels with our recruitment industry. As a member of a national advisory board to the 90 member strong Australian network we are part of, I have tried to be supportive of people in a changing industry, one that is more difficult and one in which clients consistently question the value added. One thing that I have stressed recently is that when I had a corporate career and used external recruiters, I was always meeting people from the “Recruitment and Selection” industry. I have argued that during the so called “War for Talent” (which is a ridiculous label – my best friend is in the armed forces) recruiters made money just by providing the service of finding people in a fully employed labour market. It was an easy earn for many as long as they found the people.
I have been intrigued with the race row that has threatened to undo all of the great work and recognition that the Indigenous Round was intended to provide.
So that this gets off on the right foot, let me say from the outset that it has no place in our society and that the zero tolerance exhibited by the clubs and the AFL is the only ethically defensible response. Interestingly it follows hard on the heels of me witnessing a debate while in the US recently of the sensitivity of The Washington Redskins retaining the “Redskins” name on racial grounds.
Andrew Thoseby from 1stExecutive discusses people performance and lists 4 goals you can apply in 2013 to ensure your business growth.