Monday, April 25, 2016

Why You Should Be an Entrepreneur


In his book, The Monk and the Riddle, Randy Komisar makes the point that the reason to be an entrepreneur is to avoid the stultification of companies without a soul. I tend to agree.

I believe the main reason you should consider being an entrepreneur is so you can reach your fullest potential. A few years ago former Harvard Professor, Robert Steven Kaplan, wrote an article, for the Harvard Business Review, titled, “Reaching Your Potential.”

I thought it was a pretty good article. So, I have reproduced the article, below, in its entirety. The rest of this post are the words of Mr. Kaplan:

Ambitious professionals often spend a substantial amount of time thinking about strategies that will help them achieve greater levels of success. They strive for a more impressive job title, higher compensation, and responsibility for more sizable revenues, profits, and numbers of employees. Their definitions of success are often heavily influenced by family, friends, and colleagues.

Yet many ultimately find that, despite their efforts and accomplishments, they lack a true sense of professional satisfaction and fulfillment. During my career with Goldman Sachs, as well as over the past few years of teaching and coaching managers and MBA students at Harvard Business School, I have met a surprisingly large number of impressive executives who expressed deep frustration with their careers. They looked back and felt that they should have achieved more or even wished that they had chosen a different career altogether.

Consider a very successful research analyst at a large securities firm who came to see me because he was discouraged with his career progress. This was particularly ironic because he was well known, highly regarded (ranked number one in his industry sector), and well compensated. He told me that, after 10 years, he was tired of his job, disliked his boss, and felt he had no potential for further upward mobility. Most of all, he had always wanted to be an investment manager, but he had started out as an analyst and never really reassessed his career path. He felt trapped. He feared losing his stature and didn’t want to let anyone down, but at the same time he didn’t want to keep doing what he was doing.

As we talked, he wondered if he’d been so busy trying to reach specific milestones and impress other people that he’d lost sight of what he really enjoyed doing. The truth was that he loved analyzing stocks and assessing management teams, but he also wanted to have the responsibility for making the actual investment decisions and then be held accountable for the results. I encouraged him to take action and speak to a number of investment firms (including his current employer) about a career change. After doing this, he ultimately was offered and accepted a portfolio manager position in the asset management division of his current firm. He learned that his firm’s leaders wanted to retain him regardless of job description and that they were quite surprised to find out he wanted to be on the investment side of the business. He has since become a superb investment manager, and although he wishes he’d stepped back and reexamined his career years earlier, he’s thrilled that he made the switch while there was “still time.”

If you are experiencing similar feelings of frustration or even regret about the direction of your career, this article is intended to help you examine the question, “Am I reaching my potential?” This is not the same as asking, “How do I rise to the top?” or “How can I be successful in my career?” Rather, it’s about taking a very personal look at how you define success in your heart of hearts and then finding your path to get there.

To do that, you must step back and reassess your career—starting with the recognition that managing it is your responsibility. Too many people feel like victims in their careers, when in fact they have a substantial degree of control. Seizing control requires you to take a fresh look at your behavior in three main areas: knowing yourself, excelling at critical tasks, and demonstrating character and leadership.

Knowing Yourself
Taking responsibility for your career starts with an accurate assessment of your current skills and performance. Can you write down your two or three greatest strengths and your two or three most significant weaknesses? While most people can detail their strengths, they often struggle to identify key weaknesses. This exercise involves meaningful reflection and, almost always, requires soliciting the views of people who will tell you the brutal truth. Unfortunately, you often can’t count on your boss to accurately assess your strengths or to be willing to confront you with what you’re doing wrong. It’s up to you to take control of this process by seeking coaching, asking for very specific feedback, and being receptive to input from a wide variety of people at various levels within your organization. This gathering of feedback needs to be an ongoing process because, as your career progresses, you will face new challenges and demands.

Recently I met with a division head of a large professional services firm. Though he’d been a rising star for several years, he felt he’d begun to stagnate. His direct reports and his CEO no longer seemed engaged and enthusiastic in their dealings with him, and he didn’t know why. In our discussions, he was able to specifically describe his strengths, but when I asked about his weaknesses, he gave me fairly generic responses, such as “Maybe I’m too impatient” and “I need to raise my profile.” When I pressed him about feedback from his boss he still struggled to identify even one specific weakness. I sent him off on an assignment: Interview at least five colleagues and subordinates.

He returned a few weeks later with several “surprises.” He’d heard, for example, that while he was detail-oriented and decisive, he micromanaged, had a dictatorial style, and failed to listen. Armed with these insights, he sought coaching, started working on his flaws, and began regularly soliciting feedback from his colleagues and subordinates. A year later he reported that his effectiveness had improved as a result of these ongoing efforts, and he was once again feeling confident and optimistic about his career.

This type of initiative takes time, humility, and a willingness to confront weaknesses, fears, and blind spots that many of us would rather ignore. But I never cease to be impressed by the capacity of people to change and improve once they recognize their shortcomings as well as their strengths.

Of course, getting others to tell you where you’re falling short isn’t easy—particularly if they’re your subordinates. It must be done in one-on-one conversations, and you need to give potential coaches time to learn that you’re sincere. When your employees see you actually act on their feedback, they are likely to become more proactive in offering advice, because they know you value their input. Your subordinates and colleagues will also feel they have a stake in your success and that of your unit—which will make them more likely to enjoy working with you.

Once you have a grip on your strengths and weaknesses, your next challenge is to figure out what you truly enjoy doing. What’s your dream job? How well does it match what you currently do? Many people either don’t know what their passions are or are so focused on the views of their peers that they drift into the wrong career. I was recently approached by an MBA student who wanted advice on whether to go work for a hedge fund, a private equity firm, or an investment bank. When asked whether he had an interest in financial markets, he quickly said no. He wasn’t even sure about the key tasks that each of those jobs would entail. When asked what he would do if he had $10 million in the bank, however, his answer was very clear: pursue a career in the music industry. He was a concert-level musician and loved the music business. Once he recognized how much he had been swayed by his fellow students’ bias toward the lucrative financial services industry, he realized he needed to rethink his choices.

The conventional wisdom about the attractiveness of various careers changes constantly. Twenty-five years ago the medical and legal professions were considered financially rewarding and socially desirable. Today, a number of doctors and lawyers are frustrated in their jobs and realize that they might have based their career choices excessively on the views of their peers and popular opinion, instead of on whether they would actually love the work. Hedge funds and private equity are today’s hot fields, but people who go into them without a strong enthusiasm for the actual tasks may find themselves starting from scratch a few years down the line. Loving what you do gives you the strength to weather personal setbacks, overcome adversity, face and address your weaknesses, and work the long hours typically needed to reach your full potential.

Excelling at Critical Tasks
It's very difficult to succeed if you don’t excel at the tasks that are central to your chosen enterprise. That sounds painfully simple, but many executives fail to identify the three or four most important activities that lead to success in their job or business. If you’re a medical researcher, the three keys are likely to be conducting cutting-edge research, getting published, and fund-raising. If you manage a large sales force, the crucial tasks might be attracting, retaining, and developing outstanding salespeople; customer segmentation; and client relationship management. If you’re assessing a potential job move, you need to know what will drive success in the new position and, then, ask yourself whether you enjoy those key tasks. In your current job, identifying critical tasks helps you determine how to spend your time and develop your skills.

Promising leaders sometimes lose sight of this connection. Not long ago, a new division head at a large industrial company told me that he was struggling to grow sales and profits. He complained that he was spending too much time fighting fires and didn’t have enough hours in the day. When I asked him to identify the three main drivers of success in his business, he realized that he wasn’t sure. He spent the next several weeks interviewing staff and customers, and concluded that success in his business depended on developing close relationships with the purchasing managers at each of his top 25 customers, putting the right people in critical sales and manufacturing leadership positions, and staying at the cutting edge of product innovation. He also realized that his division was performing poorly in all three areas.

He proceeded to clear his calendar, force himself to delegate tasks that were less central to success, and focus on raising the bar in each of these areas. Six months later he reported that he had replaced a number of executives—including the sales manager and head of product development—and created an executive committee that met weekly to discuss critical business issues. He also reported that he’d become much more disciplined in matching his priorities (and those of his leadership team) with the keys to success for the business. Sales and profits began to improve, and he felt confident that he would resume his upward career trajectory.

Demonstrating Character and Leadership
While seemingly amorphous, character and leadership often make the difference between good performance and great performance. One measure of character is the degree to which you put the interests of your company and colleagues ahead of your own. Excellent leaders are willing to do things for others without regard to what’s in it for them. They coach and mentor. They have the mindset of an owner and figure out what they would do if they were the ultimate decision maker. They’re willing to make a recommendation that would benefit the organization’s overall performance, possibly to the detriment of their own unit. They have the courage to trust that they will eventually be rewarded, even if their actions may not be in their own short-term interest.

Being a leader also means being willing to speak up, even when you’re expressing an unpopular view. CEOs’ proposals often generate head nodding, even from people who secretly harbor serious reservations. In reality, most chief executives desperately want dissenting opinions so they can make better choices. While emerging leaders must use good judgment regarding the tone and timing of their dissent, they also need to be aware that they can hit a plateau by playing it safe when they should be asserting their heartfelt opinions.

One CEO recounted to me his regrets over a recent key hire. His top three reports had each interviewed the various job candidates and expressed no major concerns about the final choice. After the new hire was on board—and had begun to struggle—it came to light that two of the three senior managers had privately held significant reservations but concluded that the CEO’s mind was made up and that speaking out was unwise. The CEO was furious. Though he recognized his own role in the mess (he vowed to more actively encourage dissent), he also lowered his opinion of the two executives who failed to express their views.

Otherwise confident executives sometimes overestimate the career risk of speaking up and meaningfully underestimate the risk of staying silent. I encourage people to develop various approaches to help them overcome this hesitancy: For example, I’ve counseled emerging executives to save their money to build financial security and to avoid getting too emotionally attached to their jobs. Though it may seem that you’ll never find another great job, you have to have faith that there are many attractive opportunities outside your firms.

In some cases, I advise people to become experts in some specific business area in order to build their confidence. I also encourage people to spend more time deciding what they truly believe versus trying to guess what the boss might want to hear. At work, as in competitive sports, you must play with confidence and even a little abandon. I’ve talked to several executives whose finest moments came when they gathered their courage and confidently expressed disagreement with their boss and peers. To their surprise, they found that they were treated with more respect after these episodes.

Most outstanding CEOs value emerging executives who assert themselves out of genuine concern for what is best for the company. Doing the right thing is a reward in itself—psychologically in the short run and professionally in the longer run. Of course, this approach requires that you have some reasonable level of faith that justice will prevail. I have seldom seen people hurt their careers by speaking up and appropriately articulating a well-thought-out contrary position (even when it was unpopular). However, I have seen many bitter and confused people who stalled their careers by playing it safe.

Every rewarding career will bring ups and downs, bad days, bad weeks, and bad months. Everyone will face setbacks and discouraging situations. Some people abandon their plans when they hit one of these bumps. They lose their way and ultimately undermine their own performance—and the wound is all the more painful because it is self-inflicted. The advice in this article is intended to help you avoid such self-inflicted wounds. There’s nothing anyone can do to prevent you from reaching your potential; the challenge is for you to identify your dream, develop the skills to get there, and exhibit character and leadership. Then, you need to have the courage to periodically reassess, make adjustments, and pursue a course that reflects who you truly are.


Monday, April 18, 2016

The Three Boxes


Last week I talked about Peter Drucker's organized abandonment. If you have yet to read it, click here. This week let us continue, a little further, along that path.

As I mentioned, last week, Jack Welch used Drucker's abandonment concepts to increase the growth of the General Electric company. In point of fact, Drucker's teachings have been instrumental to the development of numerous companies.

Today GE is run by Jeff Immelt. Seeing as Peter passed away in 2005, today, one of the academic who consults with Immelt's GE is Vijay Govindarajan. Govindarajan, also known as VG, is a professor at Dartmouth's Tuck School of Business.

A couple of big areas of research, for VG, are innovation and strategy. In many ways, VG has carried on the lineage of Drucker.

Govindarajan's main model is known as the three-boxes. As a matter of fact, next week VG will release his new book with that very title. So, what are the three boxes?

Actually, Govindarajan's model is pretty simple. Box #1 contains those things which a company does to manage and compete in the present. Boxes 2 and 3 are about the future.

Box #2 is labeled, “Selectively forget the past.” Like Drucker, VG knows in order to compete for the future we must be willing to let go of the past. Boyz II Men or not.

It is only after we have abandoned parts of the past that we can create the future. In fact, that is the title of Box 3, “Create the future.”

Let me put it to you this way. In its simplest terms, economics is about the allocation of scarce resources. I think all of us learned that in school.

For our purposes, the key word is scarce. No person, or organization, possesses unlimited resources. Although, sometimes it feels like Berkshire Hathaway does! But, I digress.

Business decisions are economic decisions. The main business decisions are about the allocation of resources.

By the way, this information applies, with equal veracity, to the world of the not-for-profit. Even not-for-profit organizations are subject to the rules of the market.

Very often our resources are tied up in the past. So, in order to create the future, we must free-up resources that are bound to the past. In theory this sounds rather simple. And, it is simple. But, it is definitely not easy.

Whenever you aim to abandon the past, a lot of entrenched interests come out to object. This is one of the reasons successful business leaders are so well compensated. They make the tough calls.

And, tough calls they are. The reason for the last couple posts is to remind you of reality. Hopefully, a reminder of the ways things truly are will help give you the courage, and fortitude, to let go of yesterday.

In this way we run right into the challenge of that thing Kierkegaard said, "Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards."

If you would like to watch a short overview, of Vijay Govindarajan's three boxes, click here to watch a YouTube video.


Monday, April 11, 2016

Please Allow Me to Quote Boyz II Men


It's so hard to say goodbye to yesterday. Remember that song? If not, click here to listen to it on YouTube. If you do recall the song, do you remember how cool they made it to sing A capella? Love it!

At any rate, last week I wrote about the futility of efficiently doing the wrong things. If you did not read last week's post, click here.

It is true that it is difficult to say goodbye to yesterday. We are hard-wired to resist change. Click here to read more on the subject.

Because we are wired to resist change, and we hold on to the past, it is very difficult to succeed as an entrepreneur. Entrepreneurs are fundamentally change agents. We make change happen. Which goes against human nature.

To be a successful entrepreneur you must embrace change. And, to embrace change, you must override your natural circuitry. Quite the conundrum, wouldn't you say?

So, how do we do it? Again, I will hearken back to the advice of Peter Drucker. Drucker recommended, “Organized abandonment.” I have never heard Drucker refer to the Status Quo Bias, but he knew that people had a hard time letting go of the past. Especially past “breadwinners.”

This is what happened to the Kodak company. The jewel of Rochester, New York is a dead company walking. Kodak held on to film, their past breadwinner, for far too long. And, theirs is a particularly bizarre story considering the fact that Kodak invented digital photography!


Those who are able to let go of the past can create the future. This is what Jack Welch did as CEO of the General Electric company.

Welch used one very simple question, from Peter Drucker, which allowed him to create the strategy that grew GE by leaps-and-bounds. What was the question? The question was this, if we were not already in this particular business, would we go into it today?

With this simple yet elegant question, Jack Welch decided if GE was not either #1 or #2 in any given sector, they would sell or close that business. This was quite the radical decision because, as I say, people hold on to the past.

To many people, Welch's decision was so perturbing it earned him the label “Neutron Jack.” It also helped General Electric succeed. Wildly so.

Being that it is hard to say goodbye to yesterday, Drucker was dogmatic in saying that we must be organized and systematic in our abandonment efforts. Otherwise, the decision will always be shelved, for another day, and it will never get done.

Drucker would say every three years every product must be put on trial for its life. Unfortunately, organized abandonment also applies to our human products, our human associations. And, this can be enormously difficult.

As we grow, as people, others around us make the choice to not grow. Or, they choose to grow in a direction which is incompatible with our own. This is when tough decisions must be made.

There will be times when you need to cut people lose. I know it may sound a bit savage but the market is not sentimental. What's more, we only get one life to live. Let's not waste it by staying stuck in the past. I wish you only the best.


Monday, April 4, 2016

There is Nothing Worse


Peter Drucker once said, “There is nothing quite so unless, as doing with great efficiency, something that should not be done at all.” I tend to agree. But, I prefer to paraphrase and say there is nothing worse than efficiently doing the wrong things.

As most of us know, Drucker also said, efficiency is doing things right and effectiveness is doing the right things. Though we need both, in view of the first quote, we can see that deciding on the right things ends up being more important than doing things right.

Probably the most famous example of Drucker's quote pertains to the Titanic. Efficiently doing the wrong thing would be like trying to arrange the deck chairs as the ship was going down.

But, let me give you a personal, and somewhat embarrassing, example. When I first started a business, I did like most people, and created business cards. Then, I hit upon this 'marvelous' idea to hand-write a note on each card.

I created a streamlined system whereby I could crank out these 'personalized' cards in rapid succession. I was the embodiment of efficiency. Of course, not a lot of the cards were ever given out. And, of the ones that were, the effect was virtually zero. I was doing with great efficiency something that should not have been done at all.

A Drucker example, of efficiently doing the wrong thing, would be holding on to the past. Drucker would say there is nothing quite so futile as trying to keep a corpse from rotting. Holding on to the past is such a common human tendency, it led the late Andy Grove to proclaim, “Only the paranoid survive.”

Let's talk about a very common mistake that all of us see every day. Spam email. Yes, it is true that email is an extremely efficient way to disseminate your company's information. The problem is that spam is less than useless. In fact, it can often backfire.

I have a number of Realtors, whom I have contacted, in the course of my business. Sometimes I end up sending emails to said agents. And, on a number of occasions, these Realtors have added me to their spam list. I did not opt-in. They just unilaterally added me to their mail campaign.

Now, I realize these real estate agents probably think it cannot hurt to 'drip' on me. However, they are incorrect. Not only do I not care about their messages, I have also lost respect for them and their spamming ways. I would never use them to represent me. Yes, efficiently doing the wrong things can blow up in your face.

Of course, one of the main problems with Drucker's prescription is that it can lead to procrastination because we cannot know all the right things to do before we get started. Especially in the case of the entrepreneur, we often must learn by trial-and-error. What a conundrum!

What is the solution? Well, there is a fundamental tension between efficiency and effectiveness. And, it is up to each of us to deal with that tension. One of the basic paradoxes of the entrepreneur is to possess rock solid conviction and blaze a new path. While, at the time, be humble and keep learning and improving. In a word, iterate.

There are no easy answers along the entrepreneurial journey. My suggestion today is, while you are dialing-in the efficiency of your operation, be sure to keep checking to make sure you are headed in the right direction. The real pisser is that the right direction changes over time. Sorry, but it is true. For solace, read Grove's book.

The good news is that course correction is not all that hard IF you are willing to let go of the past. Thus, organized abandonment is a subject we will discuss next week. In the meanwhile, when it comes to balancing effectiveness with efficiency, remember to do both. Always both.