What motivates high achievers? Is it money, status or power? Perhaps it is none of these. Perhaps the strongest urge is simply the overwhelming desire to escape boredom.

Unquestionably, the executive suite embraces melodrama with more enthusiasm than any other activity. Making sales, hiring new staff, generating a profit are all very well – but what really excites the boardroom is corporate intrigue. After all, even in business, the key players are not robots but humans, impelled by emotions and irrational dreams of glory or revenge. Life in many ways is but a brief play, or possibly a tragedy, and most of us are acting some imagined role or another half the time anyway.

The actual stuff that makes most companies function is mundane: producing and delivering the goods every day, efficiently and at a decent margin, can be deadly dull. So the favourite form of escapism in most organisations is to conspire and manipulate with and against colleagues like the cast in some low-budget thriller. It is a tendency that is especially pronounced among the leadership class; after all, lots of them are exhibitionists with outsized egos and a thirst for the limelight.

The remainder of this article can be read here. Please post comments below.

Hard work and relentless attention to detail: that’s management for you. Talk is cheap. Visions can inspire, for a moment or two. But without graft – and competence – things go wrong. Any business, no matter how successful, will struggle if it forgets this. There are no quick fixes for organisations that have big commercial and cultural problems.

That is the lesson to draw from the story of Little Chef, the 51-year-old British roadside restaurant chain. For generations, these little cafés, with their red and white signage, have formed a familiar part of the UK landscape. “Fat Charlie” is the diminutive chef in question, smiling out at travelling businesspeople, families and lorry drivers from the side of motorways and A roads.

At its peak, in the 1970s and 1980s, Little Chef enjoyed a dominant market position. But you did not seek out a Little Chef for a thrilling culinary experience. You went there for a reliable cooked breakfast, for plaice, chips and peas, for something acceptable to tired and hungry children. It worked.

The remainder of this article can be read here. Please post comments below.

Sad news over the weekend: Russ Ackoff has died. He was 90 years old.

Ackoff was the father of systems thinking, which in the context of management means that looking at problems in isolation is probably going to be a mistake. Work flows (or is supposed to) through a business or organisation, pulled through by customer (or user) demand. Tinkering with bits of the business without considering the whole is likely to lead to further problems.

I met Ackoff in London two years ago, when he was still in splendid form (as he was, apparently, right up until his sudden and unexpected death last week). He was a kindly, mellow, thoughtful man. And very witty.

“All of our [social] problems arise out of doing the wrong thing righter,” he told me. “The more efficient you are at doing the wrong thing, the wronger you become. It is much better to do the right thing wronger than the wrong thing righter! If you do the right thing wrong and correct it, you get better.”

There is a lot more to say about Ackoff and I hope to do so in a future column.

There is an obituary on his web site.

Do take a quick look at our regular Judgment Call feature from Wednesday’s paper. It’s a particularly good one, even if we say so ourselves.

We have sharp contributions from four distinguished commentators: Harvard Business School’s Rakesh Khurana, Rotman’s Roger Martin, Kai Peters from Ashridge and Jim O’Toole from the University of Denver.

We have asked them how good a job business schools are doing in providing an ethical education to their students. Their overall verdict: probably not good enough.

But I am over-simplifying their answers, which are worth reading in full.

Is strategy dead? Chief strategy officers will deny it. Some strategy consultants may reject the idea, too. But, right now, markets are unpredictable. The economic outlook is uncertain. The world has changed. If old-style strategy formulation is not exactly dead, then it is hardly in the best of health.

For months, many leadership teams have had only one strategic goal in mind: survival. Grander visions have been filed away or forgotten. This hedgehog-style approach – roll up into a ball and wait until things are less scary – may keep a company alive temporarily, but does little to prepare it for the future.

Analysis by Boston Consulting Group suggests that corporate hibernation only works if recessions are short, if the outside world goes back to the way it was before, and if all your competitors are equally inactive, tucked up for the economic winter. In 2009, not one of these conditions applies.

The remainder of this article can be read here. Please post comments below

England football manager Fabio Capello has had a remarkably successful career in Italy, Spain and now as manager of England (ok, he hasn’t won anything yet, but they have qualified for the World Cup). Sports analogies are used too often in the world of management speak (even for a sportsfan like me) but according to an article in the Guardian about his presentation at the Global Sports Summit in London, Capello reveals a couple of interesting truths.

First, he says that when he took over England the quality of the players was very high in training but not in matches.

“I understood everything when they played Switzerland in the first match, the same players who played well in training played with fear, with no confidence, and I said this is a big problem of the mind,” he said. “Step by step, game after game, we have improved a lot.”

Continue reading "Fabio Capello on the management of fear"

The US Chamber of Commerce is still in a bit of trouble - I wrote about the problems of the US Chamber of Commerce a few weeks ago. Now the New Yorker’s James Surowiecki questions some of the organisation’s claims on how many companies it represents. He says it could have misrepresented or “lied” about numbers of members

I highly recommend today’s analysis of Banco Santander and Emilio Botín, its executive chairman, a bank that has been able to thrive when its home market and so many of its rivals have suffered so brutally in the recession. Obviously, things can change quickly in the world of business, but their steady rise from a small bank founded in the northern Spanish city of Santander into one of the world’s largest.

From a management perspective, the really striking fact is how important leadership has been to the organisation - much of its success is down to Emilio Botín, its executive chairman - and the company’s cautious approach to risk management.

One story the piece didn’t go into detail was how the bank responded when its exposure to the Bernard Madoff ponzi scheme was revealed. Rather than trying to cover it up, they were open about it and quickly offered compensation to their clients. Not only was this a good example of handling customer relations (apparently 70 per cent of its “Madoff” customers took up the offer) it was also a brilliant communications effort. This could have been a major stakeholder relations disaster for the bank, but by dealing with it in a forthright manner, it seems they were able to minimise as best they could the damage.