Friday, April 30, 2010

Corporate takeovers are on the rise again - Los Angeles Times

Corporate takeovers are on the rise again - Los Angeles Times


Los Angeles Times

Corporate takeovers are on the rise again

Private equity fund managers meeting in Beverly Hills attribute the comeback of debt-financed buyouts to the recovery in the credit markets and the overall economy.

April 29, 2010By Walter Hamilton, Los Angeles Times

Buyouts are back.

A panel of private equity fund managers at the Milken Institute Global Conference in Beverly Hills this week celebrated the comeback of highly leveraged corporate takeovers, which had ground almost to a halt during the financial crisis.

"What a difference a year makes," said Leon Black, head of Apollo Management in New York.

Black and the other buyout honchos attributed the return of debt-financed acquisitions to the recovery in the credit markets and the overall economy.

"The high-yield market is probably better today than it ever has been," said Scott Sperling, co-president of Thomas H. Lee Partners in Boston, referring to the junk bonds that finance many private equity transactions.

The problem now confronting private equity investors: The prices of target companies have shot up faster than fund managers have been able to scoop up bargains.

"A lot of the low-hanging fruit, frankly, is gone," Black said. "The snapback has been unbelievably dramatic."

The managers also bemoaned what Black called the "populist wave" helping to fuel the Obama administration's effort to boost oversight of the financial industry.

"You're seeing some wacky regulation, which makes running our business a lot more difficult," said Ted Virtue, chief executive of MidOcean Partners, which buys midsize companies.

Still, the private equity business has largely escaped the scrutiny aimed at other areas of Wall Street. The conference's panel discussion took place Tuesday as Goldman Sachs Group Inc. executives were being grilled at a marathon Senate hearing.

"I'm glad I'm not Goldman Sachs today," Black said with a wide smile.

Access Content Source: http://articles.latimes.com/2010/apr/29/business/la-fi-buyouts-20100429

Insurance News - Cyber Risk Could Result in Potential Catastrophic Loss

Insurance News - Cyber Risk Could Result in Potential Catastrophic Loss

BestWire Services

Cyber Risk Could Result in Potential Catastrophic Loss

April 29, 2010 BestWire Services
Copyright:A.M. Best Company, Inc.
Source:BestWire Services
Wordcount:unknown

The list of typical catastrophic exposures includes floods, wind and earthquakes. But the day is coming that cyber risk will be added to that roster, according to Robert Schneider, ISO managing principal and risk management practice leader.

It may not take a Hurricane Katrina-size loss to add it, but "the realization of the potential magnitude may place it on that list," he told BestWire at the 2010 Risk and Insurance Management Society conference in Boston.

"You've got people out there working 24/7 creating some kind of cyber exposure," Schneider said. "The faceless adversary out there is the 24/7 hacker." Now multiply that by thousands, he said.

Insurance policies covering cyber risk are being written and sold, but Schneider noted those forms are created over a fairly long period of time. In comparison, new cyber threats are emerging every single day. The challenge is that technology changes "very, very quickly."

"It's an exposure that will take a tremendous amount of vigilance to monitor and keep abreast of," Schneider said. Insurers need the "ability to monitor and adjust at a very rapid rate."

And the risks go beyond simple theft. They even include acts of war, he said.

The hacker could be a high schooler in India pulling a high-tech prank, or a quasi-military operation. A cyber attack could bring down the entire banking system of a country, with "a minimum of expense, a minimum of manpower and a minimum of exposure, meaning you don't have massed troops, you have a number of people sitting in a basement," Schneider said.

It is a "potential paradigm-breaker" because it challenges some of the traditional insurance foundations, he said. For instance, geographic territory. An insurer may only write business in the Northeast region of the United States, and the cyber loss will take place in the United States, but "the source of the damage may come from anywhere" in the world ... assuming you find the source, Schneider said.

"Companies are taking it very seriously," he said. The insurance industry has "some very smart people who are looking at this very carefully."

Akin to the property/casualty sector, where insurers combine engineering with underwriting, the cyber sector requires the combined efforts of underwriters and brokers, good levels of protection and "a very well-thought-out policy form," he said.

(By Rick Cornejo, managing editor, BestWeek: rick.cornejo@ambest.com)

This is a news service of Thomson Business Intelligence Service ©2006. This content is for your personal use only, subject to Terms and Conditions. No redistribution allowed.

Access Content Source: http://insurancenewsnet.com/article.aspx?id=185210&type=propertycasualty



***********************************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Thursday, April 29, 2010

You've Made A Mistake. Now What? - Best Practices - Harvard Business Review

You've Made A Mistake. Now What? - Best Practices - Harvard Business Review


Harvard Business Review

You've Made A Mistake. Now What?

Anyone who has worked in an office for more than a day has made a mistake. While most people accept that slip-ups are unavoidable, no one likes to be responsible for them. The good news is that mistakes, even big ones, don't have to leave a permanent mark on your career. In fact, most contribute to organizational and personal learning; they are an essential part of experimentation and a prerequisite for innovation. So don't worry: if you've made a mistake at work, — and, again, who hasn't? — you can recover gracefully and use the experience to learn and grow.

What the Experts Say
According to Paul Schoemaker, the research director for the Mack Center for Technological Innovation at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School and co-author of the forthcoming Brilliant Mistakes, most people tend to overreact to their slip-ups. They "make asymmetric evaluation of gains and losses so that losses loom much larger than gains," he explains. As a result, they may be tempted to hide their mistakes, or even worse, continue down paths that have proven unproductive. This "sunk cost fallacy" can be dangerous and expensive.

It is much better to accept mistakes, learn from them, and move on. "Look forward and base decisions on the future not the past," Schoemaker says. Christopher Gergen, the director of the Entrepreneurial Leadership Initiative at Duke University and co-author of Life Entrepreneurs: Ordinary People Creating Extraordinary Lives, agrees. The most useful thing you can do is "translate a mistake into a valuable moment of leadership," he says

Here are a few guiding principles to help you turn your gaffes into gold:

Fess up and acknowledge your mistake

First and foremost, it's critical to be transparent, candid, and own up to the error. Don't try to blame others. Even if it was a group mistake, acknowledge your role in it. In cases where someone was hurt, issue an apology. However, don't apologize too much or be defensive. The key is to be action-oriented and focus on the future. How will your misstep be remedied? What will you do differently going forward?

Once you've admitted your blunder, it may be appropriate to reframe it. Reframing is not making an excuse, but a genuine effort to help people see the mistake in a different light. Poor decisions or flawed processes can sometimes lead to mistakes, but that doesn't mean that every bad outcome is a mistake. Gergen says it's important to understand what was external and internal, what was in your control and what wasn't. Explaining in a non-defensive way what led to the mistake can help people better understand why it happened and how to avoid it in the future.

Change your ways
Mistakes play a critical role in leadership development. "The best kind of mistake is where the costs are low but the learning is high," Schoemaker says. If the error was a result of a poor decision, explain to your boss and other interested parties how you will avoid making the same or a similar misstep in the future. You have to respond quickly before people make judgments about your competence or expertise. "You need to get on top of it, get ahead of it, and deal with it," Gergen says.

By demonstrating that you've changed as a result of your mistake, you reassure your superiors, peers, and direct reports that you can be trusted with equally important tasks or decisions in the future. "If you are going to pay the price for making the mistake, you need to get the learning," Schoemaker says. This is far easier in a learning culture than in a performance-focused culture, in which mistakes are often viewed more harshly. But regardless of the office environment, you need to figure out "how you can translate the mistake from a liability into an asset," Gergen says.

Rely on your support network
A strong support network can help you. "Our research shows that a healthy support network has three components: authentic trusting relationships, a diverse range of perspectives, and is reciprocal," Gergen says. Ask current or former colleagues or people outside the organization for their perspective on the mistake and what they believe you can do to recover. They are likely to have some useful advice about how to frame the error and restore your reputation.

Get back out there
It can be hard to rebuild confidence after slipping up. The key is to not let your errors make you afraid of experimentation. Once the mistake is behind you, focus on the future. If it made people question your expertise, put more data points out there to rebuild their trust. Remember that mistakes are not signs of weakness or ineptitude; recovering from them demonstrates resilience and perseverance. Both Gergen and Schoemaker emphasize that many employers look for people who made mistakes and came out ahead.

Not all mistakes are created equal
Mistakes vary in degree and type and some can be tougher to recover from than others. Schoemaker notes that group mistakes are often easier to get over because there is a diffusion of responsibility. Mistakes that involve breaking someone's trust can have lasting consequences and contrition is critical. If your mistake has caused someone to lose trust in you, approach the person and offer a sincere apology. Ask what you can do to restore his trust. But be patient — forgiveness may take a long time.

Principles to Remember

Do:

  • Accept responsibility for your role in the mistake
  • Show that you've learned and will behave differently going forward
  • Demonstrate that you can be trusted with equally important decisions in the future

Don't:

  • Be defensive or blame others
  • Make mistakes that violate people's trust — these are the toughest to recover from
  • Stop experimenting or hold back because of a misstep


Case Study #1: A supportive boss and colleagues speed up recovery
As the associate director of the Science & Environmental Health Network (SEHN), one of Katie Silberman's responsibilities is to manage the nonprofit organization's grant applications. Last August, Katie created a calendar to track important funding dates; it included due dates for current grant reports as well as deadlines to reapply for future funding. In late January, Katie emailed the foundation officer at one of the organization's primary funders to check in about their re-application for 2010, thinking she was ahead of schedule. But the Foundation Officer replied that the 2010 deadline had just passed. Katie was shocked. She had a March deadline on her calendar — that was when the report for the 2009 grant was due and Katie expected they would talk about reapplying then. SEHN needed the Foundation grant to make it through the year. "To lose a funder in this environment isn't just bad, it's catastrophic," Katie says. It turns out that each January someone at SEHN calls the foundation officer to discuss that year's cycle. Katie wasn't aware of this informal meeting, but it was her responsibility to know each funder relationship in and out and to ensure that the organization was on top of each funding opportunity.

Katie immediately called her boss, explained the mistake and offered ideas about how they could secure new funding sources to keep the organization afloat. Because she was forthright, she and the rest of the SEHN team were extremely supportive, offering to join a team call and do whatever they could to help. The foundation officer had let Katie know that there was a deadline in May for a separate round of funding and so SEHN has decided to submit an idea for a new project conceived at a recent retreat. Katie is optimistic they'll get it funded.

While Katie felt like she had made an enormous mistake, she learned from it. Her calendar of deadlines now also includes "unwritten" ones and meetings in addition to the hard dates issued by funders.

Case Study #2: Don't blame the economy, change your ways
In the late 1990s, Christopher Gergen, one of our experts from above, co-founded Smarthinking.com, an online tutoring service for high school and college students. Christopher and his partner raised their first round of financing in the spring of 1999. The company grew quickly: by the beginning of 2000, it had 30 employees and was ready to launch. Then the dot com bubble burst. In a matter of weeks, the company's financing fell through. With six weeks of cash in the bank, Christopher and his co-founder were facing one of the biggest mistakes of their lives. Like many, they failed to foresee the bubble bursting and left the company and themselves exposed.

Christopher had prior experience with companies facing hard times and had seen leaders hide behind closed doors. He and his co-founder took a different approach. They brought their whole staff together and explained exactly what needed to happen to save the company. Emphasizing that they couldn't pull it off alone, they were clear about what each person and function needed to do.

They "limped" through that spring and summer, but were able to raise a $5 million round of funding in the fall and winter. While Christopher could easily blame the economy for what happened, he takes full responsibility for putting the company in an over-extended position. "While outside circumstances were not in our control, the ability to manage through it was," he says. Most importantly, he learned from the mistake and began to take a much more disciplined approach to cash flow. As a result of how he and his co-founder handled the aftermath, the company indeed survived and now has cohesive culture with practically no turnover. It just celebrated its eleventh anniversary and made it through the recent downturn with very few hiccups.



***********************************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Strategy's Golden Rule - Umair Haque - Harvard Business Review

Strategy's Golden Rule - Umair Haque - Harvard Business Review

Harvard Business Review

Strategy's Golden Rule

The single most common competitive mistake investors, CEOs, and entrepreneurs alike make is this: striving to do slightly better what their fiercest rival already does incredibly well.

The result is usually a muddled, incoherent mess of a strategy — one that fuels not disruptive, explosive differences between a firm and its rivals, but their very opposite: bland, boring similarities.

Most companies are competitively challenged — and the Golden Rule of Strategy is how I triage them. It says:

"What your fiercest rival does badly, do incredibly well."

Consider an example. My Macbook Air recently developed the dreaded cracked hinge problem. Getting it fixed? A Kafkaesque task fit for an existential Hercules. First, I had to book an appointment at the Genius Bar, pointlessly delaying my repair by nearly a week. Then, the guy at the bar was less "genius" than the Steve Jobs control freak remix of Homeland Security. Barking at me, my interrogator began: had I dropped my laptop? Why were there scratches on it? Was I trying to pull the wool over Apple's all-knowing Cyclopean eye? Half an hour of hardball later, he (very) grudgingly agreed: just this once, out of the kindness of its heart, Apple would fix my laptop — even though it was slightly beaten up. The magnanimity!

To put it kindly, Apple's service stinks like a skunk trapped in an outhouse. For their competitors, that should be target, acquired: "What your fiercest rival does badly, do incredibly well." But Apple's rivals — Sony, Dell, Samsung — haven't mastered the Golden Rule. They're churning out Apple look-alikes and feel-alikes, trying to beat Apple at its own game — simple, usable, beautiful design — instead of changing the game. Dell, for example, has even worse service than Apple. Result? No brainer: uglier products + worse service = Apple wins. All should be applying the golden rule of strategy instead, and hitting Apple squarely in the pot-belly of poor service, where it's soft, weak, and vulnerable.

In difference lie the seeds of disruption. In similarity, only obsolescence, and decay. As Michael Porter and Gary Hamel have both so eloquently discussed, the essence of strategy is discovering meaningful differences that make a firm inimitable, singular, and unique. Strategy's cornerstone, that is how to build a disruptively different business.

To see its power, let's apply the Golden Rule. What does the Golden Rule say in autos? Ford, Chrysler, and GM spent a decade trying to best another at churning out the biggest, hungriest SUV — but none tried to do what all sucked at: make a smaller, cheaper, more fuel efficient car instead. What does the Golden Rule say in food? Big Food has spent half a century trying to make food cheaper, with artificial flavors, colors, and ingredients — but none tried to do better what all sucked at: make food more nutritious instead. What does the Golden Rule say in media? Incumbents tried for decades to lock down content in walled gardens — but none tried to open it, unlock it, and free it.

Enter a new set of revolutionaries, wielding the Golden Rule like a superweapon. Who did well what auto incumbents did badly — making a smaller, more fuel efficient car? Tata, with its revolutionary Nano. Who did well what food incumbents did badly — delivering healthier food? Whole Foods. Who did well what media incumbents did badly — freeing and unlocking content, so it was easily discoverable? Google.

The Golden Rule is powerful because it's like an economic electron microscope. It sees through overblown jargon, billion-slide presentations, endless meetings, pointy-haired consultants, evil bankers — straight to the beating heart of competition itself. When a firm employs the Golden Rule, it sees what's missing in an industry, market, or sector. The result is a strategy with power, precision, and poise.

Lazy, indolent, entitled incumbents of the world, look out: the Golden Rule's got your name written all over it. Consider the ultimate incumbent: America itself. What does the Golden Rule say for countries? America should do incredibly well what China does badly: make awesome stuff that's meaningful to people, with love, justice, purity, and passion. That's where the seeds of renewal really lie. But we're not quite there yet.

For countries, companies, and people, a strategy that doesn't challenge is like a bike with square wheels. It might get you where you want to go, eventually — but only in the slowest, hardest way possible.

Do you have what it takes? Are you attacking your rivals — or merely confronting them? Are you mastering strategy's Golden Rule? Or will it master you?

Access Content Source: http://blogs.hbr.org/haque/2010/04/strategys_golden_rule.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-DAILY_ALERT-_-AWEBER-_-DATE




***********************************************************************

http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Insurers Doing 2010 M&A Should Heed Past Lessons, Says Deloitte - Commercial Insurance & Reinsurance - Property and Casualty Insurance News

Insurers Doing 2010 M&A Should Heed Past Lessons, Says Deloitte - Commercial Insurance & Reinsurance - Property and Casualty Insurance News

National Underwriter


Breaking News - NU Exclusives


Insurers Doing 2010 M&A Should Heed Past Lessons, Says Deloitte


Published 4/26/2010





***********************************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

U.S. property/casualty insurers post higher profits: Best | Business Insurance

U.S. property/casualty insurers post higher profits: Best Business Insurance



U.S. property/casualty insurers post higher profits: Best



Posted On: Apr. 26, 2010 3:10 PM CENTRAL Add a comment Reprints


U.S. property/casualty insurers reported $31.1 billion in net income in 2009, a 260.3% increase from the previous year, Oldwick, N.J.-based A.M. Best Co. Inc. said in a special report.



Best said the P/C insurers’ results were driven by improved underwriting results, the continued recovery of the financial markets and disciplined capital management.

Boosting 2009 underwriting results were a quiet hurricane season, significant reserve releases, and a sizable reduction in underwriting losses in the mortgage and financial guarantee segments, the rating agency said.



“The overall industry’s conservative operating strategy and effective capital management leave it sufficiently capitalized to navigate the underwriting cycle and volatility in the financial markets, but challenges remain,” Best said in the report, which was released last week.


Among other results, net premiums written declined for the third consecutive year, the first time that has occurred in the years Best has been conducting the survey. P/C insurers wrote $419.3 billion in net premiums in 2009, a 5.9% decline from 2008, Best said.


The industry’s combined ratio improved to 101.2% in 2009 vs. 104% the prior year. Policyholder surplus increased to $519.3 billion at year-end, an 8.8% increase from the previous year.

Copies of the report, “U.S. P/C Industry Results Rebound as Cat Losses Ease, Investments Rise,” can be obtained by going to www.bestweek.com and clicking on Best’s Special Reports. The report costs $65 for nonsubscribers.


Access Content Source: http://www.businessinsurance.com/article/20100426/NEWS/100429932



***********************************************************************http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Saturday, April 24, 2010

Why Women Find Their Parents Unpleasant - Economix Blog - NYTimes.com

Why Women Find Their Parents Unpleasant - Economix Blog - NYTimes.com

New York Times

April 23, 2010, 1:25 pm

Why Women Find Their Parents Unpleasant

I recently received a copy of “ Wellbeing: The Five Essential Elements” in the mail. The book, published by Gallup Press, is a readable digest of survey data and academic research on what makes people happy and what makes them unhappy. To the uninitiated in this subject, you may find that the things you think make people happy are, in the words of the book’s authors, “misguided or just plain wrong.”

For example, here is a version of one chart in the book that caught my eye:

DESCRIPTION Source: “National Time Accounting: The Currency of Life,” by Alan B. Krueger,
Daniel Kahneman, David Schkade, Norbert Schwarz and Arthur A. Stone. Table 5-3.

The numbers are taken from this paper; Alan B. Krueger (a former Economix contributor and current Treasury official) was one of the authors. The study examined how Americans spent their days and how they felt when they were engaging in different activities. One well-being measure this survey helped capture is called the “U-index.” The U-index refers to the percent of time that people say they are, on balance, in an unpleasant state — for example, occasions when they say they feel more stressed, sad or in pain than they feel happy.

The bar chart shows the percent of time people are in an unpleasant state when they are around different types of companions.

It’s probably no surprise that people find spending time with their bosses — authority figures who keep them in line — to be most unpleasant. Almost a third of the time that women spend around their bosses feels unpleasant; for men, nearly half of the time spent around supervisors is unpleasant. It’s also probably no surprise that hanging out with friends — the people we choose to spend time with — is least unpleasant.

For most of the categories, men and women report being in an unpleasant state about the same portion of the time. But the biggest divergences relate to spending time with family, and not in the way that stereotypes of feminine domestic bliss might predict: Women appear much less happy when spending time with their children and parents than men do.

This can be partly explained by the different types of activities the two genders are likely to be doing around their families.

For example, when women are spending time with their children, they are more likely to be doing chores and handling child care, which can both be relatively stressful activities. When men spend time with their children, on the other hand, they spend relatively more time watching television and traveling — more leisurely activities.

The biggest gap relates to how men and women feel when spending time with their parents. When men are around their parents, they are in an unpleasant state about 7 percent of the time. Women find being around their parents to be unpleasant 27 percent of the time.

Again, some of this can be explained by what men versus women are likely to be doing when they’re with their parents. As Nancy Folbre has written here before, women are more likely to be tasked with caring for their elderly or disabled parents than their male counterparts are.

But even if you control for these different types of activities — that is, even when both genders are engaging in the exact same labors or pastimes with their kin — there are still “sizable differences in the U-index between men and women when they are in the company of their parents or children,” the study’s authors write.

So why do women feel less happy around their families, and especially their parents? Any explanations, readers?

Access Content Source:

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/23/why-women-find-their-parents-unpleasant/?src=busln

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/23/why-women-find-their-parents-unpleasant/?src=busln">http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/23/why-women-find-their-parents-unpleasant/?src=busln

>

***********************************************************************


Empowering Your Employees to Empower Themselves - Marshall Goldsmith - Harvard Business Review

Empowering Your Employees to Empower Themselves - Marshall Goldsmith - Harvard Business Review

Harvard Business Review

Empowering Your Employees to Empower Themselves

As a manager or leader, do you let your people assume more responsibility when they are able? Do you know when that is, or do you keep telling yourself that they aren't ready yet?

In my travels from organization to organization, I talk with thousands of people every year who want to be treated as "partners" rather than as employees. They want information to flow up as well as down. But, oftentimes, leaders do not want to give up control.

I knew a CEO who was the leader of one of the world's largest global organizations. He received feedback that he was too stubborn and opinionated. He learned that he needed to do a better job of letting others to make decisions and to focus less on being right himself. He practiced this simple technique for one year: before speaking, he would take a breath and ask himself, "Is it worth it?" He learned that 50% of the time his comments may have been right on, but they weren't worth it. He quickly began focusing more on empowering others and letting them take ownership and commitment for decisions, and less on his own need to add value.

Your employees understand their jobs. They know their tasks, roles, and functions within the organization, and it's time for you to let them do what they need to do to get the job done. But there is a critical point that is often missed: It isn't possible for a leader to "empower" someone to be accountable and make good decisions. People have to empower themselves. Your role is to encourage and support the decision-making environment, and to give employees the tools and knowledge they need to make and act upon their own decisions. By doing this, you help your employees reach an empowered state.

The process does take longer — employees will only believe they are empowered when they are left alone to accomplish results over a period of time — but it's effective and worth the time. If a company has a history of shutting down or letting go of initiators, for instance, the leader can't just tell employees, "You are empowered to make decisions."

Part of building an empowering environment is dependent on the leader's ability to run interference on behalf of the team. The leader needs to make sure people are safe doing their jobs. To make sure this happens, an ongoing discussion of the needs, opportunities, tasks, obstacles, projects, what is working and what is not working is absolutely critical to the development and maintenance of a "safe" working environment. You are likely to spend a lot of time in dialogue with other leaders, employees, team members, and peers.

Following are a few things leaders can do to build an environment that empowers people.


  1. Give power to those who have demonstrated the capacity to handle the responsibility.

  2. Create a favorable environment in which people are encouraged to grow their skills.

  3. Don't second-guess others' decisions and ideas unless it's absolutely necessary. This only undermines their confidence and keeps them from sharing future ideas with you.

  4. Give people discretion and autonomy over their tasks and resources.

Successful leaders and managers today are willing to exercise their leadership in such a way that their people are empowered to make decisions, share information, and try new things. Most employees (future leaders) see the value in finding empowerment and are willing to take on the responsibilities that come with it. If future leaders have the wisdom to learn from the experience of present leaders, and if present leaders have the wisdom to build an environment that empowers people, both will share in the benefits.

There are many more things that leaders can do to build and environment that empowers people. Please send any ideas you have. I would love to hear them!

Access Content Source: http://blogs.hbr.org/goldsmith/2010/04/empowering_your_employees_to_e.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-DAILY_ALERT-_-AWEBER-_-DATE

Friday, April 23, 2010

I.I.I. Urges Congress: Don’t Tax Insurers In Financial Reform Bill - Regulation/Legislation - Property and Casualty Insurance News

I.I.I. Urges Congress: Don’t Tax Insurers In Financial Reform Bill - Regulation/Legislation - Property and Casualty Insurance News

National Underwriter

I.I.I. Urges Congress: Don’t Tax Insurers In Financial Reform Bill

Published 4/21/2010

Access Content Source: http://www.property-casualty.com/News/2010/4/Pages/III-Urges-Congress-Dont-Tax-Insurers-In-Financial-Reform-Bill-.aspx




***********************************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Thursday, April 22, 2010

How to Get to No - Anthony Tjan - Harvard Business Review

How to Get to No - Anthony Tjan - Harvard Business Review


Harvard Business Review

How to Get to No

In the early 1980s Roger Fisher and William Ury authored what would become one of the best-selling business books of all time on negotiations, Getting to Yes. The book's theme was how to gain mutual agreement between parties in an objective non-adversarial manner. The core assumption behind the book (and most articles on the topic of selling or negotiations) is that both parties want a "yes." This post focuses on the importance of the "no."

I received an email from venture capitalist and popular blogger Larry Cheng, describing an investment opportunity and ending with a great phrase: "as always a fast no is better than a long maybe." I have since borrowed that sentence many times over. Too often people are not sure if they want a yes and instead create prolonged discussions because they are either: a) too embarrassed to say no, or b) just want option value.

My firm Cue Ball was recently raising capital during one of the most economically challenged periods ever to do so, and I found myself on the receiving end of "no" in more languages than I knew. As the economy improved and our portfolio held strong ground, there were suddenly many yeses and also many maybes. I found myself missing that fast no, because every maybe inevitably involved follow-up meetings, additional information, and by definition an uncertain outcome. A long maybe takes us away from the day jobs we should be doing.

I came to realize that the person delaying a decision is often not the decision-maker, but the person making the pitch. In our own desire to preserve the possibility that an investor could be swayed and cultivated, we create false hopes and become masters of inefficiency. Because of our relationship focus and soft-sell process, we sometimes forget the need to push for the "ask" and more importantly, for a definitive decision. For prospective investors on the other side of the table, there's little downside to delaying a definitive no. Time allows one to see more information and make a more informed decision. How can you blame them?

So if you are on the pitching or selling side of an opportunity, what can you do to drive a prospect to decision? Here are four things that can help:

  1. Be clear on the "ask". I have seen people pitch us with brilliant clarity of ideas, but a cloud of ambiguity on what they want from an investment partner in terms of both capabilities and dollars
  2. Set a firm deadline and sense of urgency. When meeting any prospective investor, customer, or buyer, set a clear deadline for a decision. In most cases you can get to a definitive yes or no just by being clear about a close date.
  3. Agree to and adhere to a post-pitch process. Outline next steps for the follow-up. What additional documents or meetings are required for a decision? When will these occur and will there be sufficient time given the deadline at hand? If nothing is required, agree to the next follow-up date and the form of the follow-up. Make the follow-up timing shorter than your gut tells you: if you think you should follow up in two weeks, say a week. A follow-up in two weeks often means that the person is revisiting the issue in 13 days (the day before follow-up) versus six days for a follow-up in a week.
  4. Affirm the silent no and provide an out. Become better at trying to confirm the silent no. Schedules change, people ask for more time, and other priorities take over. Know how to escalate to the no. Prolonged silence or indecision requires a forcing mechanism. Something along the lines of "I want to thank you again for your time considering this and realize that now may not be optimal timing. Can I assume a pass for now?" Human nature is more conditioned to a yes or maybe, rather than a no. Politely providing an out is usually appreciated by the other side, and it is a good way to elicit a definitive decision or gain clarity on the best next step.

A yes is obviously the answer you always hope to get, but the ability to get a no, especially if it is a quick one, is critical to maximizing efficiency and effectiveness. The sooner you get a no, the faster you'll be able to look for that next yes.

Access Content Source: http://blogs.hbr.org/tjan/2010/04/how-to-get-to-no.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-DAILY_ALERT-_-AWEBER-_-DATE

Don't Get Distracted by Your Plan - Peter Bregman - Harvard Business Review

Don't Get Distracted by Your Plan - Peter Bregman - Harvard Business Review

Harvard Business Review

Peter Bregman

Don't Get Distracted by Your Plan

Wait a minute, I thought, as I looked up from the trail we had been hiking for several hours. Where are we?

I knew I was lost. Unfortunately, I wasn't alone. I was leading a thirty-day wilderness expedition for the National Outdoor Leadership School (NOLS). Which, in this case, meant there were eight 16- to 24-year-old students following me.

For most of an expedition, NOLS groups travel off trail. We use topographic maps that reflect the physical features of an area — mountains, streams, valleys, ridges — and we navigate through the wilderness by comparing what we see around us with what's on the map.

Each morning we agree on our goal — where we plan to camp at the end of the day — and then choose a rough path through the wilderness. We know the general direction we're moving and maintain our course by paying attention to the environment — keep that mountain to the left, that small river to the right, and that craggy peak in front.

Every once in a while there happens to be a trail that travels in the same direction we're traveling so we follow it. It makes for easy walking.

But a dangerous thing happens when we follow a trail: we stop paying attention to the environment. Since the trail is so easy to follow, we allow our minds to wander and neglect to observe where we are.

Then we forge ahead, moving with speed and purpose, right to the point where we look up and realize, like I did that day, that the environment around us is no longer recognizable. Our focus blinded us.

This is not just a hiking thing.

In business and in life we set all kinds of goals — build a company, meet sales objectives, be a supportive manager — and then we define a strategy for achieving that goal. The goal is the destination; the strategy is our trail to get there.

Only sometimes we get so absorbed in the trail — in how we're going to achieve the goal, in our method or process — that we lose sight of the destination, of where we were going in the first place. And we walk right by the opportunities that would have propelled us forward toward our planned destination.

Which is what happened to Sammy, a religious man, who was caught in his house during a flood. He climbed up to his roof and prayed, asking God to save him.

Sammy saw a wood plank in the water and let it float by. "God will rescue me," he said to himself. After some time, a man came by in a boat and offered him a lift but Sammy declined. "God will rescue me," he told the man. The water continued to rise; it was up to his neck when a helicopter flew overhead. Sammy waved it off saying "God will rescue me." Finally, Sammy drowned.

Next thing he knew, Sammy was in heaven, where he was greeted by God. "Why didn't you rescue me?" Sammy asked. "I tried!" God answered, "I sent a wood plank, I sent a boat, I sent a helicopter..."

OK, so it's not a true story, but the point is still useful. Sammy was so committed to his strategy of God saving him that he missed the rescue.

I started my company over 12 years ago with a 50-page business plan. It was a very useful tool — it kept me focused, helped me avoid mistakes, enabled me to settle on a growth strategy. But if you look at my company today, it looks nothing like that plan.

Because the economy changed, I changed, my clients changed, and the opportunities changed. If I had stuck to my plan, I would have failed. It was by keeping my eye on the changing environment, and being willing to toss the plan and create a new one in sync with new realities that enabled me to grow my business.

I remember hearing a mother speak about how difficult it was for her to parent her autistic child. "I'm not the parent I planned to be," she said. "I'm the parent I have to be."

I've noticed the same thing about great managers. They might have a plan for how they want to manage. But they're constantly shifting that plan based on the strengths and weaknesses of the people they're managing.

Monitor and adjust. That's the key to effective leadership, indoors or out.

On the trail, I stopped my group of students and admitted that I had gotten us lost. I explained how being too focused on the trail can easily lead us astray.

"Great," answered a 16-year-old boy sarcastically, "so how do we get unlost?"

"You tell me."

"Look at the map?" he suggested.

"And your surroundings!" I added.

Access Content Source: http://blogs.hbr.org/bregman/2010/04/dont-get-distracted-by-your-pl.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-DAILY_ALERT-_-AWEBER-_-DATE

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Forget Your Elevator Pitch — What's Your Dumbwaiter Pitch? - Umair Haque - Harvard Business Review

Forget Your Elevator Pitch — What's Your Dumbwaiter Pitch? - Umair Haque - Harvard Business Review

Harvard Business Review

Forget Your Elevator Pitch — What's Your Dumbwaiter Pitch?

So you've got an elevator pitch — a short, pithy description of why your business is special, exciting, and unique. Yawn. Today, elevator pitches are the economic equivalent of speeches at a beauty pageant: predictable, often vapid, always bland.

Here's a suggestion. Try a Dumbwaiter Pitch instead. It's an exercise I often do with startups, giant corporations, social entrepreneurs, and investors. Its goal? To strip an organization right down to its bones, and see how compelling it really is.

What's the one-word description of your business? That's right: just one word. The most common answer is: hmming, hawing, and silence. The second most common answer is an imaginary benefit. The third most common answer is a raw product — just another mass-produced, meaningless commodity. All three answers reveal a business with whose foundation, its economic concept, is confused, muddled, and perhaps even nonexistent.
Let's go through a few examples.

What's the Dumbwaiter Pitch for a soft drink company? "Happiness" is Coke's latest answer. Of course, the link between soft drinks and happiness is tenuous at best, and probably totally nonexistent in reality. Let's get real: the Dumbwaiter Pitch for a soft-drinks company isn't "happiness." It's just "sugar-water." And in a world where the costs of obesity on the one hand and poor nutrition on the other are ever more apparent, that's a weak, uncompelling proposition.

What's the Dumbwaiter Pitch for Vertu — the Nokia subsidiary that makes luxury mobile phones? "Luxe" doesn't work — it takes more than merely ostrich leather to make high-end tech, as Apple's groundbreaking software so vividly keeps demonstrating. Blinged-out versions of a $50 phone that sell for 100x the price? The only Dumbwaiter Pitch for that set of economics is "consumption." And that highlights the problem with the very foundation of the business, its economic concept. In a world where consumption must rebalance sharply, Vertu's concept has reached its expiry date.

What's Foursquare's Dumbwaiter Pitch? If it's "gaming," there are plenty of more involving games, more powerful substitutes around. If it's "connection," who's connecting? There's a long way, it seems, to go before real connections are made. The Dumbwaiter Pitch highlights the need for Foursquare, while cool, to get serious about next-gen economics.

What's Twitter's Dumbwaiter Pitch? I'd say: "alerts." And that's powerful in a roiling, seething world where risk and volatility are vastly amplified. Information that alerts you to possibilities and opportunities matters more than ever before. You can't get alerts anywhere else: not at Google, Yahoo, or Microsoft. Twitter is one of the few companies in the economy with a solid, compelling Dumbwaiter Pitch.

In simplicity lie the seeds of explosively powerful propositions. In complexity, only confusion, incoherence, and uncompetitiveness.

Reductive, simplistic, restrictive? Think again. Nearly every disruptive business, in fact, has a Dumbwaiter Pitch as pure, simple, and powerful as Niagara Falls. Google? Search. Apple? Beauty. Lego? Creativity. Conversely, companies that aren't sharp-eyed enough to see that their real Dumbwaiter Pitches are lame, tired, or just plain evil — well, they usually end up facing extinction. Wall Street's should have been "wealth" but it was really "looting"pow! Big Pharma's should be "health" but it's really "pricing"zap! Big Food's should be "nutrition" but it's really "obesity"bang!

The Dumbwaiter Pitch is so powerful because it cuts through the obfuscation, glad-handing, and double-talk so beloved of boardrooms and beancounters and asks them to get straight to the real point. And, of course, like the sharpest of scalpels, it reveals where there never was any meat on the bones to begin with.

Only businesses with a razor-sharp, laser-focused vision — and a disruptive economic concept — can craft a Dumbwaiter Pitch. Do you have what it takes? What's the one-word description of your business?

Access Content Source:

2010 College Grads To See Slightly Lower Starting Salaries

WorldatWork.com

2010 College Grads To See Slightly Lower Starting Salaries

2010 College Grads To See Slightly Lower Starting Salaries


April 13, 2010 — Starting salary offers to the college Class of 2010 are down compared to last year at this time, according to a new report.


The report from the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE) shows the overall average salary offer to a bachelor’s degree candidate is $47,673, which is 1.7% lower than the average offer of $48,515 made to Class of 2009 bachelor’s degree candidates.


Although the overall average salary offer is down, some disciplines did see increases, according to the report. For example, in the business disciplines, both finance and accounting majors saw their average salary offers rise. The average offer to finance majors rose by 1.6% to $50,546, and the average offer to accounting majors inched up by 0.4% to $48,575.


The report showed that business administration/management grads saw their average offer fall 8% to $42,094. Marketing graduates’ average salary offer also fell, but not as far, to $42,710, down 2.1% from last year.


Graduates earning computer-related degrees saw their average salary offer soar in comparison to the other disciplines: Their average offer rose 5.8% to $58,746. And, the average offer to computer science majors increased by 4.7%, bringing it to $60,426.


Engineering graduates saw their average salary offer increase by 1.2% to $59,149. Electrical engineering grads saw the largest increase of the engineering disciplines. Their average offer rose by 3% to $59,326. Chemical engineering graduates’ average offer is up 1.6% to $66,437, and civil engineering grads saw a similar increase — 1.3% — bringing their average offer to $52,443.


Computer engineering grads, however, saw their average offer move up just a scant 0.2% to $61,121. Mechanical engineering graduates also saw a 0.2% increase, bringing their average salary offer to $58,881. Liberal arts grads may be the hardest hit by the effects of the recession: Currently, their average salary offers remain well below last year’s levels — 8.9% lower at $33,540.


Contents © 2010 WorldatWork. No part of this article may be reproduced, excerpted or redistributed in any form without express written permission from WorldatWork.

Access Content Source: http://www.worldatwork.org/waw/adimComment?id=36938





***********************************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Ten Simple Tricks To Remembering Names - Forbes.com

Ten Simple Tricks To Remembering Names - Forbes.com


Ten Simple Tricks To Remembering Names

Helen Coster, 04.20.10, 11:02 AM EDT

Is it Joe or Jim? Sally or Susan? Here's some help.





Few situations will make you cringe more than standing next to someone you've met several times and drawing a blank on his or her name.


Plenty of business deals and romantic rendezvous have been foiled because someone failed to recall the right name at the right time. In the Web age e-mail and social networks offer safe harbor; being able to use someone's name (and pronounce it correctly) in a face-to-face situation can set you apart.


"Everyone struggles with remembering names," says Jill Spiegel, author of How to Talk to Anyone About Anything. "When we first meet someone we're taking in so much visually and emotionally. They say their name, but it's up there floating in our heads." Making matters worse are all the single-syllable American male names, like Chris, Mike or Tom, that tend to blend together.

Top Tips: 10 Simple Tricks To Remembering Names


There are tricks to remembering names. Master even one or two and you'll be in good shape.


Benjamin Levy, author of Remember Every Name Every Time, advocates the FACE method: "focus, ask, comment and employ." Focus: Lock in on the person's face. Ask: Inquire which version he prefers ("Is it Ted or Theodore?"). Comment: Say something about the name and cross-reference it in your head ("My college roommate's name was Ted.") Employ: Put the name to use--"Nice seeing you, Ted"--to drive it home.


For a full list of simple name-recognition tactics, check out our slideshow. For a quick handful, read on:


Repeat, Repeat, Repeat. The most surefire strategy is to repeat the person's name--both in your head, and out loud--as soon as possible after you've been introduced. Occasionally use the person's name in conversation. "Pleasure to meet you, Bob," or "Bob, so good to see you." Don't overdo it, of course, but don't worry that Bob will recoil, either. He'd rather you remember his name than not.


Find The Trigger. Try to associate names with things people tell you about themselves (careers, hobbies) that will trigger the sound or association of the name in your mind. Fred likes to fish, Margarita runs a bar--you get the idea. "You have to search in the moment for something familiar," says Spiegel. "It's a simple trick, but it just sticks."


Word Play. Let the words do the work for you. Mnemonic devices (Dale works in sales) work nicely, as does alliteration (Joann from Jersey).


Speak Up. Embarrassing as it seems, don't be afraid to ask someone to repeat his or her name. Start out with a compliment, such as "I've had so much fun talking with you, and I've completely forgotten your name." If you realize you've blanked on a name a few seconds after introduction, just say: "I'm sorry, I missed your name."


Once you've gotten over the hurdle of remembering someone's name, you might face the added dilemma of not knowing whether to address the person by a first or last name. Spiegel recommends starting with the person's last name followed by a flattering comment and a casual introduction, such as "Mrs. Smith, I'm such an admirer of yours. My name is Susan." The person just might respond, "Nice to meet you. I'm Mary."

Problem solved.

Access Content Source: http://www.forbes.com/2010/04/20/how-to-remember-names-entrepreneurs-human-resources-remember-names_2.html


***********************************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

CFOZone.com - The Network of Corporate Finance - Clawbacks quickly catching on

CFOZone.com - The Network of Corporate Finance - Clawbacks quickly catching on


CFO Zone

Clawbacks quickly catching on

By Stephen Taub

T. Rowe Price has joined a growing list of companies that have voluntarily instituted clawback policies.

The mutual fund giant Friday announced in a regulatory filing that if it needs to undergo a material restatement of its financial results within three years of the original reporting, the Board will take certain actions if it determines any executive officer received incentive compensation, including equity awards, based on the original financial statements that in fact was not warranted based on the restatement.

The potential actions include the recoupment of all or part of any bonus or other incentive compensation paid to the executive officer, including equity awards; disciplinary actions, including termination; and/or other remedies.

There are two reasons companies are instituting clawbacks: If there is wrongdoing resulting in a restatement, or for strictly performance reasons.

Of course, Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act contains a clawback provision that requires only the CEO and CFO return any bonus or other incentive-based or equity-based compensation received during the 12-month period following the first public issuance or filing with the Commission of an accounting restatement due to material noncompliance. They also must give back any profits realized from the sale of securities of the company during that 12-month period.

However, the SEC has only invoked this provision a handful of times.

Altogether, 73 percent of Fortune 100 companies had clawbacks in 2009 compared with 18 percent in 2006, according to a report from Bloomberg, citing Equilar, an executive compensation research firm.

There are a number of different reasons companies can take back their dough from executives. In some cases, the company may have restated prior results due to wrongdoing even if the executive was not involved in the wrongdoing.

An executive may have been deemed to have taken excessive risk, the wire service noted.

Kenneth Feinberg, the U.S. special master on executive compensation, has legal discretion to institute clawbacks from any TARP recipient if it is determined that compensation was received based on material misstatements or misrepresentations. So far he has not used this authority.

However, Bloomberg notes that five companies are subject to mandatory clawback provisions in 2010: General Motors, GMAC, American International Group, Chrysler Group and Chrysler Financial.

Meanwhile, a number of Wall Street firms are instituting clawback provisions on their own.

For example, in January J.P. Morgan Chase said any employee who receives company stock as compensation is now subject to clawbacks. According to the Wall Street Journal, the bank can force employees to return stock awards if they were found to have taken excessive risks or didn't blow the whistle on bad risk-taking.

Morgan Stanley recently told investors that its clawback policy, first instituted in 2008, was strengthened in 2009 to apply to substantial losses on trading positions, investments, commitments or other holdings. It also applies when risk parameters, compliance or ethics standards are violated.

In addition, it created at-risk performance units for senior executives that represent a significant portion of compensation and pay out only if the firm meets specific performance targets-return on equity and relative shareholder return-after three years.

Bank of America said in its proxy that a significant portion of compensation will be made through restricted stock awards that do not vest until the third year after grant and which are subject to clawbacks for performance (based on continued profitability), detrimental conduct or certain financial restatements.

Beginning with performance year 2009, equity awards to executive officers and other key risk-takers are subject to a "performance-based clawback" to encourage sustainable profitability over the vesting period. Under this clawback, awards may be canceled in whole or in part if losses occur during the vesting period.


Also beginning with performance year 2009, equity awards are subject to a detrimental conduct clawback to encourage compliance with policies and appropriate behaviors. If an executive officer engages in detrimental conduct, unvested awards are subject to cancellation and previously vested awards may be recouped, the financial giant said.


In addition, since October 2007, BofA said it has had a recoupment policy under which the Board can require reimbursement of any incentive compensation paid to an executive officer whose fraud or intentional misconduct caused the company to restate its financial statements



Access Content Source: http://www.cfozone.com/index.php/Newsflash/Clawbacks-catching-on-quickly.html

Monday, April 19, 2010

Leading Blog: A Leadership Blog: Does Your Leadership Have “White Space?”

Leading Blog: A Leadership Blog: Does Your Leadership Have “White Space?”


Leadership Now - Leading Blog

Does Your Leadership Have “White Space?”

In the visual arts, white space is that area that is left blank or perhaps more accurately, open. It should not be thought of as unused space because it is actually an important part of the design itself. It is an “active” void. It adds to or enhances what the artist is trying to communicate. It clears away the clutter and allows the message to be heard.
white space
Effective use of white space in graphic design

As leaders, we need to be secure enough to create white space in our leadership; to create not emptiness, but an active void. A place where those we lead can jump in and participate. It’s about making room for others to express themselves. Too often, leaders feel the need to be omnipresent; directing everything that happens. This stifles those they lead and stunts their growth.

Wendy Richmond is a visual artist, author, educator and a contributor to Communication Arts. In a recent column she discusses the need for white space in teaching art. She provides a wonderful example of the value of white space as applied in teaching and leadership:
In my teaching, I use the idea of white space as a metaphor. When I develop a syllabus, I also design the activities for which I will not be present. On the first day of class, I tell my students, “By the end of this course, I hope to be the least important person in this room.” I believe that in addition to providing the content, my role is to create an environment that contains an active void. I need to disappear enough for my students to jump in and fill the learning environment with their own excitement and discovery. Again, as in my artwork, it takes confidence to leave that space empty.

I have a friend who teaches memoir writing. In every session, each student reads a short piece of his own writing. In the first two classes, my friend makes notes as she listens, and then delivers a constructive critique. In the next class, she institutes a change. After each reading, instead of delivering her critique first, she waits for the participation of the other students. Inevitably, there is silence; an awkward void where there is no response.

Initially, my friend found it hard to remain quiet. She feels that it is her job to keep the class engaged, to be imparting knowledge. In other words, as she told me, she had to make sure they are getting their money’s worth. It required confidence to not fill the silence with her critique. She had to trust that this emptiness was essential; it allowed the students to develop their own responses. When her students began to talk, there was a new energy that continued not only during the coffee breaks, but between classes as well.
Creating white space in your leadership requires balance. Leadership is an art. White space doesn’t reflect a lack of leadership or structure as it might seem. On the contrary, strong leadership is what makes it possible. A leader has to shape that space in an ongoing way to ensure that they are allowing room for people to develop themselves, contribute and lead. The question is: do you as a leader have the confidence to do that?

Access Content Source: http://www.leadershipnow.com/leadingblog/2010/04/does_your_leadership_have_whit.html

Saturday, April 17, 2010

Derek Sivers: How to start a movement | Video on TED.com

Derek Sivers: How to start a movement Video on TED.com

Video: 3 minutes 10 seconds

About this talk
With help from some surprising footage, Derek Sivers explains how movements really get started. (Hint: it takes two.)

About Derek Sivers
Through his new project, MuckWork, Derek Sivers wants to lessen the burdens (and boredom) of creative people.

Access Content Source:
http://www.ted.com/talks/derek_sivers_how_to_start_a_movement.html

***********************************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.

Friday, April 16, 2010

How to Confront an Office Bully - The Conversation - Harvard Business Review

How to Confront an Office Bully - The Conversation - Harvard Business Review


Harvard Business Review

Blogs




How to Confront an Office Bully





The tragic story of Phoebe Prince's suicide after relentless bullying and mobbing by teenagers at her high school in South Hadley, Massachusetts, is capturing international media attention. Nine students have now been indicted in this case. However, until all the media scrutiny, the bullies suffered seemingly no consequences. Many peers and teachers were aware of what was happening, but only a few reported this behavior to school authorities, including Phoebe's mother. Nothing was done until it was too late.


In a similar situation in 2008, 31-year-old Jodie Zebell from Wisconsin committed suicide after enduring months of workplace bullying from her peers and supervisor. Last week, the Wisconsin legislature listened to her story and others as the Healthy Workplace Bill was introduced.


Gary Namie and Ruth Namie in their book The Bully at Work describe how bullies thrive on secrecy, shame, and the silence of others. The authors' Labor Day 2008 Survey (of which 95% of the 400 respondents had been targets of bullying) revealed that 95% of the target's co-workers of any rank — peers or managers — witnessed the mistreatment at least once. Yet 53% of the employers did nothing to stop the mistreatment when reported. In fact, in 71% of the cases, employers actually retaliated against the person who reported being bullied. The authors provide many reasons for "Witness Paralysis" including a natural human aversion to risk, Groupthink, rationalization, and blaming the victim.


Bullies are hugely expensive for corporations in terms of lost dollars, productivity, employee retention and wellness. The research strongly suggests that the only way to get organizations to take this issue seriously, particularly in competitive environments where bullying behavior is implicitly rewarded, is if it impacts their bottom line. It will be immensely more expensive once the Healthy Workplace Bill — which has now been introduced into 17 states — is actually passed.


Bullying can't survive in workplaces that won't support it. Intervention by management is a powerful weapon to reducing bullying in the workplace. Most targets can't win alone — most bullies will never stop. It's a complex issue, and intervention often carries consequences. But there are situations where it's worth the risk, personally and professionally.


My client George, Regional Manager at a technology company, shared this story (names have been changed):


George and his entire team met with corporate for the annual review. This was George's third review. They were always tough but civil. Dan, the most senior corporate manager, had a reputation for being a bully. When Bob, a problematic local manager, stepped up, Dan began to aggressively tear into Bob in front of his peers and subordinates. The behavior was startling and abusive. George could see that this public humiliation had quickly put the whole team on edge. He had a dilemma. How could he: a) stop the destructive energy in the room, b) avoid becoming the next target, and c) not lose his job?


George called a timeout. Leading Dan out of the room, he told him his approach was inappropriate and destructive to both Bob and the rest of the team. Dan, unhappy about being called on his behavior by a subordinate, fought back. But George held his ground, telling Dan he was embarrassing himself and the corporate management team, and he was hurting the opportunity for a valuable corporate contribution and quite possibly next quarter's results. Dan backed off. The tone of the meeting shifted and became productive. In the following weeks Dan allowed George to take more of an active role in managing Bob. Next quarter's results were great for the team. The next annual reviews were much more positive.


What worked?



  1. George quickly assessed the impact of the bullying behavior from an organizational perspective. In that moment before he called timeout, he feared that if he handled the situation badly he could lose the respect of his team, even his job. But he told himself, "I may lose my job, and if so I will find something else. This abuse must stop."

  2. He made a choice to intervene: "I just think there are times when it's important to do what you can live with and that is more important than the risk or consequences. I realized I would not be able to look in the eyes of the people who worked for me if I didn't at least say something, whether or not it changed anything."

  3. He interrupted immediately. The longer bullying goes on, the harder it is to stop.

  4. He addressed the bully personally and in private. Bullies hate public humiliation.

  5. He appealed to the bully's self-interest. It was quickly clear that Bob and the rest of the team's feelings didn't matter to Dan — but when George framed the issue in terms of personal embarrassment and corporate results, Dan was motivated to change.

You do have a choice, even in these times of workplace stress. The next time you're tempted to remain a silent witness, remember that in stepping up to save a co-worker, you might even save a life.



Cheryl Dolan, MA, has over 30 years' experience with over one thousand clients as a speech/language pathologist and executive coach, specializing in leadership presence, communication, creativity and change theory. Her focus is to cultivate clients' inherent strengths to develop powerful communication and innovative thinking skills to enhance personal and professional performance.





***********************************************************************
http://dreamlearndobecome.blogspot.com This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.