Leadership
strategy
By: Maria
Johnsen
Why many companies are not able to make a
financial
progress and development?
Nowadays we know how important is the role market
forces play
in industry profitability and the importance of winning over
competitors.
These facts have come in large part from the economic infusion
into the study of leadership strategy. Strategy has been
narrowed to a competitive game plan, separating it from a
company's larger sense of purpose and the exaggerated emphasis
on competitive advantage which has drawn attention away from
the fact that strategy must be a dynamic tool for the
development of a company over time.
During all these years strategy has been lectured in various
business and computer sciences schools. It was identified as
the most important duty of the chief executive officer (a
person with important responsibility). The ubiquitousness SWOT
model taught managers to improve their company' s internal
strength environment. Later cooperative planning and standards
emerged analysis were added their own frameworks. It has been a
period that strategy tool kit became far richer because of it.
That said, something has been lost along the way. It has become
more formulation than implementation! That is why companies
experience financial loses every year and leaders blame it on
the world's financial crises, employee's bad work performance
and so on.
Take Norway as an example: Most of the executive
managers,
directors in the major government co- operations and private
sectors have problem with leading their enterprises to the
right direction! They do need leadership coaching.
They follow the same cliche formula that has been
employed
for many years at the company all over again and changing
managers and employees do not help it at all! The main issue is
that whoever comes in and takes the boss's place does the same
procedures all over again with some minor so called " changes":
A new guy!
Most of the departments have fear from making changes.
Why?
Because they have fear from becoming a failure or losing their
big fat paycheck every month! They are not sure about as to
whether ot not the new idea could be working.
They should understand that by implementation of the
new
strategies they will breathe a new life into company's
existence and survivance.
I used to work as a system designer at one of the
Norwegian
major companies in Trondheim Norway. My job was to fix system
errors develop 3 calculators for their portal, writing use
cases regarding these systems, developing GUI along with
translation of the whole portal into English language. Because
of my good working performance I was moved to a bigger 3 years
old AND sensitive project.
As
soon as I started my work at that department, I noticed within a few
days lack
of co-operation among 35 employees who were programmers,
designers, system developers and system maintenance employees.
These problems clearly worried the company's top executives.
That is why they had to hire from a recruiting company a team
of so called experts to jump in and drive this boat towards
the island of victory and great result. However during the
meetings I noticed that these young, arrogant, hard headed
project managers were following an old strategy that would have
been doing more harm than good to such big cooperation! Such
cliche strategy would also lead the company to major financial
problems.
It was like making a hole in the same boat in a stormy ocean!
What do you think will happen to such boat? Bingo. That's what
i thought as well! I warned them about what they would face
within a short time and nobody were willing to listen to me. I
resigned and guess what? 3 months later, they declaired almost
bankruptcy, over 150 programmers, project leaders, system designers
either got fired or resigned from that company! So what were problems
you may ask.
Problems:
- The spirit of racism, harassment,
mockery among
employees
-Arrogant professional managers and project
leader
were unwilling to co-operate with each other
- Unwillingness to listen to constructive
criticism
and suggestions
- Ordinary employees had to carry on the huge
responsibilities that the leaders dictated them to do, hoping
to get finally the promotion
- Lack of leadership strategy
- Lack of implementing of new strategies that WORKS
- The high level of employees absence
- Dissatisfaction of work environment
- The new changes were not discussed with all
employees
during the meetings if there were any changes at all
The result was obvious more financial problems and
less profit
with a not user-friendly system.
I have been working in various departments both at the
government and private sector and unfortunately I noticed the
same pattern everywhere. Companies with satisfactory
performance were able to implement the newest technologies and
recruiting the right people at the right position.
The major problem at all these companies is to have fear from
the CHANGE and having the right knowledgeable leaders!
Over the past few years strategy has become a plan that
positions a company in its external landscape!
Strategy SHOULD GUIDE the development of the company and
its
purposes over time.
What is missing?
The goal should be creation of value. Strategy as a
dynamic
process should be employed and help the leadership to be as CEO
as chief strategist. It should give form as an organic process
that is ADOPTIVE, HOLISTIC, AND OPEN ENDED. The time frame
should be continuous and unending. The ongoing activities
should foster competitive and advantages must develop the
company through time.
In conclusion most strategies involve mystery.
Interpreting
that mystery is a responsibility that the chief of strategist
the CEO should handle. The need to create and recreate reasons
for a company's existence sets the strategist apart from every
other person in the company. Mastering the management system is
an important job that should be given to the right people. 78%
of people who are hired are NOT right for the job. This is one
of the major problems at the Norwegian companies both at the
government and private sectors. They have typically two or
three round interviews but the techniques that they use scare
away the right people .They put the wrong people in the
positions which should belong to the suitable candidates.
It is clear that not only Norway but also many
countries in the
US and Europe have the same problem in respect of recruiting
the right candidates. This issue may affect on a company's
performance as a result they lose more money by hiring the
wrong person than the right one. Why you may ask?
* A wrong person for the job concentrates on doing their
job
while the right person will focus on getting the better
result.
* A wrong candidate focuses on securing their job by
having
relationship with employees at the different departments at the
company. This way the employer will not be able to fire him or
her, because there is no one else who can do his/her job and
everybody likes the person! The right person thinks of working
as a team in order to be more successful.
* A wrong person never share ideas with their colleagues
,
because all they care about is monthly paycheck while the right
person for the company wants to find a way to lead the company
towards more success as a result he may get promotion and help
the strategic plan to succeed.
Conclusion
It is important for the companies to be more focused
on using
the right updated strategies, hiring right leaders and managers
who care about the success and company's development and
employing the right candidates. Result will be obvious
financial gain, better working environment and progress in
development.
|