Healthcare: A Perfect Problem with No Perfect Solution

In the United States, we have two “perfect problems”: our Healthcare system and our Taxation system. What makes these problems perfect is their absolute complexity and an almost universal agreement that a problem exists.

The focus of this article is on healthcare.  I’ll leave taxation for another day – even though eventually our country will not be able to truly address one without the other.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKOfXlB_3Wo]

Up until December of 2006, I did not think a lot about healthcare.  It was something I had, something I paid for, and with the exception of annual check ups for my family, something that I rarely had to use.  I knew it was a problem, but it was not necessarily mine. That changed December 21, 2006 when I became the CEO of the Arizona Small Business Association, and had to answer to and speak on behalf of our 3,000 business members and through them over 200,000 employees. 

The more I researched, surveyed, and listened; the bigger the problem became.  And I was just looking at one state, and within that, only one subset of the population, small business owners and their employees.  Yet both in our state and on a nationwide basis estimates from both the Federal government and independent agencies estimated that of the 45 million people plus who lacked health insurance, approximately 60% of them either owned or worked in a small business.   The constantly rising cost of health care was a burden these businesses were struggling to battle.  Others were starting to give up hope that anything could be done.

LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS:  HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE IN THE UNITED STATES

Source: Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2007, p.69

hc-numbers-chtThe chart at right shows the estimated U.S. population (as of 2007) and the breakdown of the insured/uninsured and where the insurance comes from.

But as we all know, there have been some pretty significant economic factors since 2007 that probably shift these numbers upward in the areas of both government provided program and the uninsured due to the significant change in the unemployment rate (4.7% in June of 2007 vs. 9.7% in June 2009) and the continuing economic pressures on businesses of every size.

With a problem this large, it’s hard to have any impact.  Especially when it’s also highly complex and politically charged.  At the state level we had various mandates, imposed and proposed, that were continually driving the costs up.  A state provided program for small business had serious limitations and flaws not to to mention a serious deficit that threatened its sustainability.  The whole thing was a mess. 

I had learned a long time ago that it is almost impossible to tackle a really big complex problem – but that if you break it into little ones and tackle them one at a time, you can make headway.  So that is what we did.

First we framed the problem with a set of goals.  Our conditions for success were the following:

  1. It had to be available to any business of any size (even groups of 1) without limitation.
  2. It had to cover the entire state AND provide coverage for employees out of state.
  3. It had to provide the same level of quality care and service that was available to employees in a Fortune 500 company.
  4. Coverage had to be guaranteed issue with no pre-existing conditions limitations as long as there had been prior qualified coverage and pricing and eligibility would NOT be determined by health status of the employees.
  5. It had to be reasonably affordable and competitive.

The next step was to look at what resources we had to work with and to identify potential partners.  We reached out to corporate partners, legislators, the Governor’s office, and national organizations to see what was available, what we could work with or what we could change.  Through a combination of negotiations, partnerships, and collaborations, we were able to design a plan that met all five of our defined goals and launched it 10 months after we started the process.  To see the full details of the program, visit the ASBA website

Now, this program did not solve the national problem, but it did provide a solution/option for the community we served across the state of Arizona. AND, it did so without a single taxpayer dollar.  Best of all,  from 2007 to 2009 the gross increase in premium was a total of THREE percent while at the same time the program benefits were enhanced – not reduced.

So my question is this.  Perhaps, while they battle in Washington tackle the perfect problem of Healthcare Reform – and fight over every sacred cow.  Maybe, just maybe, individuals like you and me, in our little corners of the country can build viable solutions by breaking the problem down to smaller more manageable chunks and tackling them one at a time.  That way WE can solve the problem and THEY can keep on talking.

Thanks for stopping by.  Stay Tuned…

Joan Koerber-Walker

P.S. While I no longer serve as the CEO of the Arizona Small Business Association, my time there taught me something very important.  There is very little that can not be accomplished by American small business with a little hard work. collaboration, and ingenuity.  If we focus on the challenge, frame it properly and get down to work the results can be pretty incredible. 

What DO you do?

Friday I got a tweet very early in the morning, just as I was heading out to a 7 AM meeting across town.  It said simply “What Do you do?” I sent of a quick note explaining with a link to my website and my number so the person could call me later if they wished.  Grabbing my purse, I headed out to the car.  As I was driving to my meeting with The Shea Group that question stayed on my mind.

Silver_Bullet_GripsThe Shea Group is a collection of executives and business owners who understand that learning and career development is a lifelong process.  Each time the group meets, a speaker shares their experience as part of the session.  This time it was Jack W. Milligan of Leathers Milligan & Associates a long time veteran in the area of human resources and executive career management.  Jack told us a story that really resonated with me.  It went like this…

“This is a secret that only human resource professionals know.  Hidden deep in every company, there is a special closet where they keep the silver bullets.  On the day that you start, they will engrave your name on one.  On the day that you leave you will get it back.  They may shoot you with it, or they may hand it to you as they once did an engraved gold watch.  But, that bullet is there and it has your name on it.  It is up to you to be prepared.”  Jack W. Milligan

Jack went on to share tips and techniques that every executive should be employing to manage their career both during employment and during the transition process that is sure to come at one time or another. 

So today I decided to give some real thought to answering the question – What Do you do?  Not just based on what someone might find on my resume or bio – which shows what I have done, but in  terms of what I actively do and engage in and what I hope to bring to the next growing company I have the opportunity to lead.

My “What I do list”

  • Engage employees and partners in our organization’s vision and with them develop a plan that delivers tangible results.
  • Lead throughout the execution process by example.  Never ask another to do something that I personally am not willing to do.
  • Communicate openly and often on what is working, what needs work, and what is yet to be done. Use every appropriate platform – from public speaking,  to writing, to informal chats to deliver the message.
  • Listen to what our customers and our market has to say, learn from them, and put those lessons to work.
  • Take forgotten or underutilized resources and redeploy them for added results
  • Reach out to our community to offer assistance, share ideas, and keep our organization connected, engaged, and respected.
  • Develop and mentor the people around me so that when my silver bullet comes, they can continue on the journey to find even greater success.

What’s on YOUR “What I do list”.  It’s a great exercise – try it and see.

Thanks for stopping by.  Stay Tuned…

Joan Koerber-Walker

Looking back at a Perfect Storm

During the downturn that shook the foundations of the technology industry after the dot.com implosion, I wrote and article about the Perfect Storm that hit the industry.  In that article I suggested that there are Seven Deadly Sins that can challenge the stability of the supply chain and our overall economy.  This was written in July 2002.

Reading it now, seven years later, it is amazing how we have seen the storm hit once again – this time in the construction and finance industries.  Hopefully someday we will learn our lessons.

bigwave2The Perfect Storm:
What happened to the Supply Chain in 2000/2001
and could it happen again?

July 3,  2002.

In November of 2000, Roy Vallee, Chairman of the Board of Avnet, Inc., the worlds largest electronics distributor, announced, at the Avnet, Inc. Annual Shareholders Meeting, that Avnet was seeing indicators that the Technology Boom of 2000 may not be sustainable.

This unleashed a storm of protest from analysts, investors and supply chain participants. While today we all know that those indications were all too true, with hindsight, we, as an industry, only wish he had been wrong. As the technology sector slowly begins the climb out of the most dramatic downturn in its history, the question asked repeatedly is… “How did this happen? & “Will it happen again?”

Many hypotheses have been put forward in the last year as to what happened and why it was so extreme. Some attribute the cause to:

  • The external environment – globalization, industry consolidation, Y2K, or the dot.com implosion and resulting telecom plunge;
  • Industry cyclicality – sharper and more dramatic cycles as the size of the industry and key sectors within it grow disproportionately;
  • Technology – our sophisticated IT systems let us down. The forecasts were all wrong;
  • An increasingly complex supply chain;
  • Wall Street – pressure for growth driving unrealistic forecasts; or
    All of the above – a Perfect Storm!

Pick any of the above and you can find people to agree with you as to what was responsible.

Interestingly, each of these factors is a “thing” we can point to. We do not have to take personal responsibility because it was an external economic effect, an industry group or corporation at fault, not us.

Organizations and IT systems do not make the decisions that drive the supply chain, people do. Each one of us represents a link in the supply chain and it is the choices we make every day that drive the outcome. Until each of us within the industry chooses to accept this responsibility, we are doomed to face similar extreme business cycles in the future.

So, if human beings are the key factors that control the supply chain, what are the human conditions that drive our supply chain behaviors?

The Seven Deadly Supply Chain Sins

The Path of Least Resistance: In our increasingly busy roles, seeking the path of least resistance comes naturally. Whether as engineers, we design with parts we have always used it the past (designing in parts at the end of their product life cycle or missing out on possible benefits procurement or manufacturing may gain with a more commonly available part) or as procurement and materials professionals we do not make the effort to establish part numbering standards so we truly know what we have and what we need. At one time or another, in good times and bad, we have all fallen into the trap of viewing the old ways as “good enough” rather than making the extra effort to optimize our systems and our processes.

Self Preservation: From birth, self-preservation is the most basic human instinct. Each of has a natural inclination to protect ourselves, our jobs, and our companies. In times of allocation or constraint, a buyer may double order or increase forecast requirements to ensure his company gets what it needs to keep the production lines going. In isolation this may be a small thing, but across an industry, this can create a groundswell of demand that may be unrealized as capacity is increased and product frees up. Within our organizations we use this nature of self-interest by creating incentive programs to drive certain behaviors. Unfortunately, these often conflict from department to department. Thus, our materials team must keep inventory low to earn their incentive and the sales team needs product on hand so they can get the sales level they need to make their sales goals. These conflicting interests lead to distrust and ultimately to breakdowns in communication or even distorted information as each individual protects his or her own interests. If our lines of communication break down within our own companies, how can we provide accurate information to our partners across the supply chain?   

Risk Avoidance: If as human beings we have a natural inclination to protect our selves, the next logical progression is to shy away from risk or find ways to shift the risk from ourselves to another. In the supply chain this manifests itself in many ways. In our contracts and legal forms we add penalty clauses and loop holes to shift the risk of doing business from us to another. Whether it’s the quality of imperfect forecasts, the liability for service or product failures, or artificial or often unnecessary restrictions on date codes, we often spend much more time and effort constructing rules and systems to shift risk to another than we do investing together to improve processes and systems to identify and mitigate the real risks we face. 

Fallibility: “Nothing and no one is perfect. There is always a margin for mistakes. But naturally the other guy will let us down more often then we will err. We must protect our selves from his failures.” This is the thinking that leads us to greater supply chain inefficiencies – bonded inventories, excessive buffers, padded forecasts, and ultimately inventory gluts. It is often easier to assume our supply chain partner will let us down than it is to pick the RIGHT partner and work closely with that them to develop strategy and process so both of us will be successful. 

Distrust: If everyone else is driven by self-interest, risk averse and fallible, no wonder we find it so hard to develop the levels of trust we need to share good information and partner effectively. When we do not trust our suppliers to deliver, we compensate in the supply chain. When we do not trust the product groups to have enough inventories, we pad the sales forecast. When we do not trust the MRP system we tinker with it. When numbers don’t give us the answers we need, we “adjust” them until they do. With everyone doing what comes naturally, it’s a wonder we get any good information across the supply chain at all. 

Greed: Whether you believe that “Greed is Good” or greed is bad, the interesting thing we often forget is that greed is not just about money. Greed is getting your “unfair share” of money, market position, market power, attention, and information. Interestingly if you take the word greed out of the description, it reads like the objectives of many of our companies. 

Increase Revenue & Profits
Increase Brand Position
Increase Market Share
Increase Market Intelligence

It is when greed gets out of control that we get into trouble. At the peak for the last technology wave, that is what happened. As investors we got caught up in escalating stock prices based on company projections that had little basis in financial reality or business basics. This influx of capital created a flurry of investment in telecom systems, IT infrastructure, and other products creating a groundswell of demand. As demand increased and supply became constrained, as buyers, we compensated within our supply chain to ensure we got our “unfair share” of what we needed. As sellers, we raced to capture orders and market share to get our “unfair share” of this inflated demand. And as an industry, we reeled in shock as the whole thing imploded. And then we started looking for someone to blame.   

Denial: When we refuse to acknowledge the truth, we are in denial. Another way to look at denial, one we got caught up in this last time around, is getting caught up in a wave of unrealistic optimism that approaches euphoria. Things were so great in our industry and we were so proud of our strategies, our growth, and our success, that we failed to look closely at the business basics our companies were founded on. Not only do we need to be aware of our own tendencies to get caught up in unrealistic optimism, but we must also be aware of the affect of those around us. When our biggest customer doubles his forecast, we double ours, plus a little extra just to be safe. So does his next supply chain partner and the next one. Soon the forecast has grown beyond anything sustainable, even assuming that the first projection of double growth was correct. At an industry or market level it is even more complicated. Here, when the analysts predict the market will grow by X%, each market participant projects that they will capture their unfair share. If you go back and add each company’s projection up, the aggregate often exceeds the level of projected growth. These are some of the storm clouds on the horizon that signal rough weather ahead.

Are We Doomed?

So with all of our faults, is it hopeless? Are we doomed to ever increasing and sharper cycles? NO! Each of us, at each level of our organizations has the power to drive change in the performance of the supply chain.

Looking at the bigger picture: Whether we call it a supply chain or a supply network, the reality is that the choices, decisions, and actions of each of us, individually, link to others within our companies and across the supply chain. If we are to truly develop the level of quality information needed to drive to success, we need to recognize the linkages to internal customers, partners, and external customers and ensure that we are sharing the highest quality information available at all times if we are to be successful in reaching optimal levels of performance.

Each of us must Dare to Innovate – Design for Supply Chain Information – Providing the design engineers with not only easy access to technical information, but also information on the product life cycle of the components, their availability over time, and parts that are most commonly used within their company and within their industry to reduce the potential for stock outs in time of constraint and liability inventory in times of excess. 

Materials Management and Procurement – Investing in resources, tools and partnerships to create solutions for standardization of part numbers and sharing that information between departments (like engineering) and other manufacturing sites around the world.
Manufacturing – exploring systems, tools and processes that add visibility into inventory activity at the point- of use and relaying it back through the supply chain to support lean manufacturing for lower manufacturing costs and greater inventory trend data to support improved forecasting within the materials management function.
Operations – establishing systems and processes to link global operations and create inventory and supply chain visibility. (This is especially challenging for international companies running on disparate computer systems.)  

Channels To Market – Ensuring that we have the right channels mix to match our products and services to the needs of our customers. Then, ensuring that the right information and support systems to support those channels are put in place to get maximum return on the Sales and Marketing efforts across the direct, representative, distribution, and self -service channels. 

Be generous with your supply chain partners: The opposite of self-preservation and self-interest is generosity. This willing ness to give and share freely is the key to our success as partners in the complex supply chain. Generosity manifests itself in the willingness to share complete and accurate information to partners, not just that portion that supports what you need right now. It also extends to the willingness to pay for the value a supply chain partner provides, and the openness to share what portions of the partners’ value proposition truly adds value. In today’s tight financial times, neither buyers nor sellers can afford services that do not add measurable value to the supply chain process. 

Understand Risks and create process improvements to mitigate them – Accept responsibility: No business relationship is without risk, especially as you move across a complex supply chain. The key is to mapping the process to identify the potential for problems and establishing service recovery systems to address them. In recent years the trend has been not to manage risk, but to try to shift it across the supply chain from the OEM to the CM to the distributor or Manufacturer of the component. For the supply chain to work effectively and for the participants to openly share information, each supply chain partner must accept responsibility for that part of the supply chain information and risk that belongs to them. Otherwise, innovation and trust between partners becomes impossible. 

Dare to Trust/Share REAL information: The key to being able to trust your supply chain partners is to pick the RIGHT partner, then give them complete and accurate information, set reasonable allocations of risk based on accountability for the supply chain information each generates, and then let them do their job. Choose the right partner based on their ability to get the job done, their track record within the supply chain and the innovations they can bring to your processes that add value and help you realize your goals. 

Greed is not all bad, but blind greed is dangerous: Wanting to get your “unfair share” is what business is all about. However, when we blindly pursue market-share, revenue, or other business metrics beyond what the marketplace can support, we all ultimately suffer. New innovations and businesses are developing to help us look at excess inventories across the supply chain. Identifying these excesses and redirecting them inside our businesses, channels, industry groups or the marketplace allows us to circumvent the build-ups of inventory that ultimately lead to gluts and market declines. As an industry we must enter into new types of relationships with our supply chain partners to add greater transparency to not only the product we need for the future, but also the residual inventory that is left sitting across the supply chain. By increasing this visibility, we get a better picture of what is needed, what is left over. We then have the opportunity to shift the resources back through the chain and put those assets to work for us rather than pushing them off to a partner as a liability. 

Temper Optimism with Realism: At the height of the boom, optimism was at its highest point. The cyclicality of the technology industry was “a thing of the past” and business was continually headed up and to the right. As the market drastically corrected, reality set in and we all scurried for cover, drastically cutting back on our product requirements, canceling orders and pushing as much liability away from our selves and back towards our supply chain partners. In the darkest days of the downturn, we lost our optimism and trust in each other, cut our costs wherever we could and battened down the hatches to ride out the storm. Looking around us, we hoped that we would make it through and knew that some others may not.

Today the storm clouds are beginning to dissipate and many analysts predict that we are starting a slow recovery from the Perfect Storm that started in 2000/2001. As we move towards recovery, there are lessons we have learned that point us towards smoother sailing in the future if we choose to heed them and learn from the painful times we have been through. We must hold on to the optimism that better times are ahead, and invest accordingly, but we must also temper that optimism with a never ending awareness of the market forces swirling around us and not be afraid to raise the storm flags when optimism conflicts with market reality. 

So, to answer the questions we started with: How did this happen?
Because we let it.

Will it happen again? By the nature of technology, there will always be a measure of cyclicality in our industry, but the shape of those cycles is up to all of us based on our supply chain behaviors. Eventually, there will be other storms in the high tech industry. It is our choice if we sail right into them, as we did this time, or if we plot a new course, one marked by the sharing of accurate and complete supply chain information between partners, a willingness to be held accountable for our supply chain information and decisions, and a willingness to take the time to find the RIGHT partners and then give them what they need to support us across the supply chain.

How will you chart your course?

(This article was originally published in the CorePurpose Executive Brief,  July 2002)

Thanks for stopping by.  Stay  Tuned…

Joan Koerber-Walker

Just call me a ‘Preneur

I feel a rant coming on – bear with me please.  I don’t do it often.  Indulge me and perhaps by then end I can even find something positive to add. 

To start off – I really, really, really dislike the word ‘entrepreneur’.

entrepreneur“Why?” you might ask.  “Aren’t you one? “

The answer is probably yes by some peoples’ definition and then by others’ it would be no. 

There are few words in our business lexicon that are more misused, argued over, or modified than the word entrepreneur.

With all the talk about entrepreneurship these days, you would think our generation invented it.  We did not.

The word entrepreneur was first coined in the eighteenth century by Richard Cantillon and later expanded upon by Joseph Schumpeter in his writing the Theory of Economic Development  in 1911 .  It first appeared in Webster’s dictionary in 1852 and it’s definition is actually very simple according to today’s Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary –

en·tre·pre·neur  (noun)

Date: 1852  Etymology: French, from Old French, from entreprendre to undertake

: one who organizes, manages, and assumes the risks of a business or enterprise

In today’s business literature, we now find a plethora of _____preneurs.

    • Intrapreneurs – entrepreneurial people inside an  enterprise
    • Co-preneurs – husband and wife entrepreneurial teams
    • Solo-preneurs – the me- myself- and I crowd
    • Mommy-preneurs – does being a Mommy make your business different?
    • Home-based-preneurs – does it matter where your office is?
    • Serial-preneurs – these folks just can’t seem to get enough…
    • Green-preneurs – these are the save the planet, eco-friendly folks
    • Social Venture-prenuers – the make a difference folks
    • Micro-prenuers – smaller scale ventures
    • Macro-preneurs – get out of my way I’m gonna be big!

et cetera, et cetera, et cetera!

And then we have my personal favorite – the snob-preneur – those entrepreneurs who look at other classes of -preneurs and confidently state that the other group really is not an entrepreneur at all.  They do not count.  They are just a life-style business, or a non-profit, or a franchise, or a …..

You can find snob-preneurs everywhere.  I’ve had this debate with some of the top authors of best selling books on entrepreneurship (and no, I am not naming names) as well as with entrepreneurial advocates across every level of the continuum.  It is like entrepreneurship is some exclusive club and only certain people have the right to belong.

But going back to our simple definition, an entrepreneur is a person: one who organizes, manages, and assumes the risks of a business or enterprise.

It should not matter whether…

you own the company or work in it. 

you go it alone, partner with family, or grow your team to be a cast of thousands.

your office is in a corporate complex, your garage, your basement or your car.

your enterprise is structured to create wealth for shareholders, for yourself, to create greater value to society as a whole,  or any combination thereof.

Instead, let’s celebrate the “one” in the definition.  The person who see an opportunity, has the courage to pursue it despite the risks, and who through their passion and persistence creates something great – by their definition – not ours.

Perhaps, it’s time for a new word to encompass that.  Preferably one that is easier to spell. 

Got any ideas?

  Thanks for stopping by.  Stay tuned…

Joan Koerber-Walker

Are Leadership and Management Mutually Exclusive?

Are you a LEADER? Do you even want to be? One of the hottest topics of conversation in business and education today is leadership. We talk about it in the boardroom; we look for it in our elected officials, and integrate it into the classroom from the elementary school to the university. Back when I was in school, we focused on learning how to manage. Today we focus on learning how to lead. But, we may have shifted the focus too much. Contrary to so many things we read today, management and leadership are not mutually exclusive skill sets.

innovation 4The reality is that we need both managers AND leaders depending on the circumstance. Probably the easiest way to know what style is needed when is to look at what you are doing. When we are involved in making sure an event comes off smoothly, a plan is executed cleanly, or we are keeping track of important things at home or at work, we need to manage. When we are motivating people, changing directions, or exploring new areas, projects or things with our family, friends, or work teams, we have the opportunity to lead. Note that we have an opportunity – not necessarily an obligation – to take the lead. In many cases, too many leaders can be worse than too few. If multiple leaders are pulling the team in different directions – you don’t have leadership – you have confusion. But if you build your team with a solid mix of managers and leaders – with both respecting the contribution the other brings, you have a better chance of getting to where you are trying to go.

To manage or to lead? That is the question.

Much has been written on the difference between management and leadership. Two of my favorite writers on the subject are Warren Bennis and Ken Blanchard. Both have created great models that explain the difference between managing and leading and both draw the distinction between managing processes and leading people. The following table is a combination of their ideas and mine. It gives you a nice short list of the styles and behaviors we use when we manage or lead.  

Managers Leaders
Are Systems Focused Are People Focused
Direct Activities Encourage People to get on board
Control Assets Create or find resources
Risk averse Risk tolerant
Administrative by nature Innovative by nature
Focus on How and When Focus on What and Why
Emphasis on doing things right Emphasis on doing the right thing
Goal/Plan Oriented Visionary
Monitor near term results Look to the far horizon

As you look at the differences between the two, it is very clear – great leaders are important for our future direction – but it is the team and the managers that actually get the work done and make sure things happen. It’s like Oreo® cookies and milk – both are good individually, but together they are even better.

Preparing mangers and leaders…

So often we hear of people who are born leaders. Implying that leadership is instinctive or programmed into your DNA. You either have it or you don’t. But if you look at the games we played as children, they actually laid a foundation for our future management and leadership skills. In our early years the best follower was usually the winner. Think about games like Simon Says, Mother May I, and of course, Follow the Leader. Paying attention to details, following directions, and doing things just like your ‘leader’ was the key to success. If you were the best at observation and imitation, you won the game and moved to the front of the group.

As we grew older, new activities began to focus more on our talents and skills whether it was in the class room, scouting, clubs, sports, or music. Normally we chose the person we would follow based on their skill or experience. The games or activities had rules or guidelines, but within boundaries, we were encouraged to be creative in order to achieve our goals or win as a group. We also quickly learned who was best at a particular activity and more often than not, they became the leader for the day. Our parents, teachers, coaches, or troop leaders became our role models. How they managed or led were the examples we used to develop our own individual style. When we saw things we admired, we emulated them. In other cases, we may have rejected what they did and how they did it. Creating our own style based on the way we wish we had been treated. If you follow this logic, managers and leaders are not born. They are formed by the examples and the experiences we give to them. When I think of it this way – it makes me think twice – suddenly it’s just about what I need to accomplish, but it’s also about the way I will do it. If someone is always watching, how I choose to manage or lead will impact not only today’s activities but can have a lasting impact on the future managers or leaders who are watching what we do.

If no one is following you – how can you be a leader?

As every good drum major knows – they may be marching out in front – but the band makes the music. Good leaders and managers know that it is their team that makes the difference on whether or not they will reach their objective. Leadership implies that there must be followers. Management implies something to manage. Good managers and leaders must also not be afraid to step back and follow when another’s skills, talents or experience would provide a better solution. And as role models, we can demonstrate the value of being a follower as well as the person out in front. Our job is to recognize what skills to use and when so that the team is successful, the job gets done, and the vision becomes reality. After all – that’s what management and leadership are all about.

Thanks for stopping by.  Stay tuned…

Joan Koerber-Walker

Want More Opportunity? Be Strategic.

Who doesn’t want more opportunity? Here’s a simple idea for more and better opportunities – create a personal strategic plan for your business, career or job search and start with a Personal SWOT analysis. 

Image converted using ifftoanyWhat’s SWOT? The letters stand for Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats.

Businesses have used this tool for years.  Why not put it to work for you at a personal level to manage YOUR own growth?

Take out a piece of paper and draw lines so you have 4 equal quadrants. Label the top two: Strengths and Opportunities. Then mark the bottom two Weaknesses and Threats.

Start with your strengths – list as many as you can think of. Then move down the page and list all the things you wish you were better at.

Now look at what you have written as Strengths and in the Opportunity column list one potential opportunity that can come to you from each strength.

Now look at your Weaknesses. What could keep you from realizing these opportunities. Write it down and think about what you might do to keep your weaknesses from becoming threats to the opportunities you have listed. Write them down and take action.

Whether you are running a business, managing your career, or looking for a job, this simple strategy works.  Just give it a try. (Oh and don’t forget to look at your resume and make sure that all of your strengths show up in what your resume says about you!)

Thanks for stopping by.  Stay Tuned…

Joan Koerber-Walker

Partnering – You Can’t Succeed Alone

“If the company with the best partners wins, how do you create great partnerships that last?”

j0439356[1]
Having a great product or service is not enough. In today’s world of competing technologies and services – the company with the best partners wins. But how do you create great partnerships that last? Partnerships that take your product or service and build it into solutions that make customers want to buy and investors want to invest?

Our partners are all around us.

They are the people and organizations that help us get from where we are – to where we want to be. Partners include our employees, our customers, our investors and the outside suppliers of goods and services we work with to make things happen.  Having spent two decades in the electronic distribution industry, I saw a lot of great products come and go. Some were wildly successful while others faded away. The companies that succeeded long-term understood that making their product accessible took partnerships with a broader network like distribution. At the same time, distributors with staying power understood that to build a lasting partnership, they had to add value to what the manufacturer had to offer. Pure transactional relationships don’t work in this world. The levels of investment and time horizons for payback are too long. For both parties to receive the maximum benefit – they have to commit for the long haul.

Are our perceptions of partnerships changing?

As I look around, I am amazed at how transactional we have become in our partnering relationships. A great example is the change in how we look at our employees. In my father’s generation – the partnership between employer and employee was often a lifetime commitment. Through good times and bad, you worked towards a common goal. You grew together. You helped each other. You were partners. You did not talk about it. You just did it. That’s the way it was. Today, we talk about employee satisfaction. We talk about growth and empowerment. We talk about strategy, teams, and commitment to a common goal. But when things get tough, do we stick together or part company. I don’t need to answer the question. The answer is all around us.

And the scariest part of this partnering shift is what it is teaching our next generation.

“There is no partnership. There is no commitment. Look out for yourself.”

If this is what we are teaching our future workforce through our example – we’ d all better watch out!

Successful partnerships are a lot like successful marriages.

My father worked for General Motors for over 40 years. He and my Mom will celebrate their 50th wedding anniversary on August 1st. It started me thinking. There is a connection here. 

Whether we’ re looking for a date or scanning the field for a business partner, we look around for the most attractive person we can find. The one that sparks our interest – answers a need – has what we want. In the beginning, it’s not hearts and flowers – just the basic laws of attraction. There is no commitment at this phase, just a lot of checking each other out. It’s superficial like an advertisement, a website, or a resume. We see what they want us to see. And, if we like what we see, we reach out to learn more.

The next step is the courting phase. Here we check each other out to determine the right fit. Courting is like dating. We’re getting to know each other as individuals. What we really want and what we really do. In the beginning everyone is on their best behavior. But as you start to spend time together away from the day to day
distractions, you start to get more comfortable and relax. That’s when you start to see the real person you are looking to partner with. In business we call this due diligence. We test the water comparing long term goals and how we like to do things. We match our values. We explore how we can help each other. We listen to what the other person says and we pay attention to what they aren’t saying. Just like when you’re dating, each side wants to look their best for the other person. Sometimes you need to look a little deeper to see the real partner underneath. When you like what you see – when your values match – then you are ready to commit.

Next you get engaged. It’s more than just setting a date. You are setting expectations, making promises, setting goals. As you get ready to take the plunge, you are mapping out the future of the partnership. What you will do. How you will do it. You learn to handle details and who does what best. You start to come together as a team. By the time you get to making it legal, the deal is done. The contract – whether a marriage license, a contract or a purchase order is simply confirmation of what you will set out to do together. Over the life of your relationship, you learn to work with each other, to compromise, and to adjust so that each person is getting what they need.

Like a marriage, lasting business partnerships are personal. They take thought, effort and personal attention to make them work. But most of all they require and open mind and a willingness to negotiate.

We negotiate with people, not companies.

Partnerships that last are built through a continuing series of negotiations. The relationships in the partnership are not based on the life of a contract – they last generations. This key is so simple we often miss it. Each new objective starts with a negotiation. As the partnership grows, we learn more about each other. We take that knowledge and use it to set new plans and higher goals based on each other’s strengths. 

Companies don’t negotiate – people do. Traditional styles of win-lose or win-win negotiations focus on the tally sheet between the contracting parties. Keeping score of ‘who got what’ does not make for a lasting marriage and it doesn’t work in lasting business partnerships either. To keep things working, we must develop a new form of relationship based negotiations. Each party looks at a longer horizon, acknowledging that there will always be conflict and compromise but always placing the health of the overall relationship as the highest priority. When we do this, we anticipate our partner’s needs and care enough to help them fill them. Each time we do so, the bond grows stronger, the partnership better, and we benefit. Not just today, but long into the future.

Thanks for stopping by.  Stay tuned…
Joan Koerber-Walker

Welcome to the Board.

One of the questions I get frequently is “How can I get chosen to serve on a Board of Directors?”  There seems to be a caché attached to these positions, and since I have served, and continue to serve on multiple Boards of Directors and Boards of Advisors, sooner or later the question comes up.

At Parenting AZ BenefitThere are many types of boards.  They range from those in the non-profit world, to community associations, industry associations, government agencies, private companies, and public companies.  And in each case the role is a little different.  But, the one commonality across the continuum is that the role of the board member is about service.

Boards look for individuals who believe in the organization’s mission and can help move it towards it’s goals through a combination of Time, Treasury, and Talent.

So, where do you fit?  It might be helpful to look at each of these different types of organizations and the associated board roles so that you can see what type of service is expected of a quality board member and then you can look at your own skill set and see if board service might be for you.

Advisors

Advisory Boards exist in both the for-profit and not-for-profit worlds.  In this case, board members are chosen specifically for their expertise.  Here TALENT and experience is the main determining factor.  Advisory Boards come in all shapes and sizes for advisory of government agencies, to start ups, to scientific organizations. 

The major difference between Advisory Board positions and the other board roles discussed here ties to the concept of Fiduciary Responsibility.   In the case of advisors, your role is to observe, council, influence, and to provide knowledge, contacts, or input.  Conversely, in the role of Director or Trustee, you have the additional legal obligations to oversee and hold in trust and support not only the mission of the organization but to also protect it’s real and intangible assets, including oversight with legal compliance.  This is known as fiduciary responsibility.

Directors and Trustees

Non-Profits: Charitable Organizations, Community Organizations and Agencies look for board members that meet the specific needs of the organization in addition to fiduciary responsibilities.  Financial compensation (paying for board service) is fairly uncommon, and often prohibited by the organization’s by-laws.  But don’t be surprised to find that board members are expected to contribute generously of both time and or talent as well as cold, hard cash to support the organization through either sponsorship, donations, or rolling up your sleeves and doing real work to move the mission forward.  In these organizations, the public and the employees are the primary stakeholders board members are expected to safeguard and support.

Membership Based Associations can be either for profit and not for profit.  But in both cases, the board has a new constituency to look out for – the members.  Often board members are elected by the membership and from the membership of the association.  As an association board member, expect to be asked  to be very visible and engaged in the activities within your membership community. 

Start Up Companies, Privately Held Firms, and Public Companies.  As we move onto the for profit arena, all of the fiduciary obligations apply – but you have a new set of stakeholders you must satisfy – the investors.  At this level, board members get paid.  Compensation comes in the form of cash, equity or a combination of the two.  Just remember, people expect more from you when they are paying you.  Be prepared to deliver.  The larger the organization, the more compensation is normally involved, but with that also comes more responsibility, more meetings, more committee work, and more people you ultimately have to keep happy.  Once you get to the highest levels, shareholders look to the board to safeguard their interests AND be responsible for ultimate company performance.  At one time, being on the board of companies like General Motors, Lehman Brothers, or a major bank were envied positions.  Would you want to be one of those directors today?

Still interested? 

As you can see, board service can be a lot or hard work and responsibility.  The key to being invited or elected to a board is to reshape your thinking.  Board service is not just standing up and graciously accepting applause from the crowd at a fundraiser or being seen as a leader at public events or in the media.  It’s about making a contribution of your time, treasury and talent. 

Take a look at the various organizations in your community.  What do you have to contribute?  How can you help them?

Get involved, start volunteering, share ideas, show them what you can do. 

When you make a difference – you won’t have to ask to be involved at a higher leadership level.

They will ask you!

Thanks for stopping by.  Stay Tuned…

Joan Koerber-Walker

 

Creative Excellence

This weekend, it has been hard to go anywhere without hearing talk about the life and death of Michael Jackson. While driving in the car listening to KTAR yesterday I heard two radio personalities, who had met, him recapping his life.  They told a story that all of us can take heed of – whether you are a Michael Jackson fan or not.

Thriller cover

The story went like this…

During the production of Thriller, Jackson’s sixth album and the best-selling album of all time,  Jackson had just finished recording the ninth and final song.  The record’s producer, Quincy Jones, reportedly asked Michael this question.

Of all the songs, which  are your least favorite three?

Jackson told him three songs and Quincy Jones replied –

“Let’s re-do them. ”

and they did.  That album made recording history.  In today’s age of iTunes and downloads, it is unlikely it will ever lose its place as the top selling album of all time.

What an incredibly valuable lesson.  How often have we embarked on a project and judged it finished without taking one last objective look at what we have created.  Do we make the time to move forward towards creative perfection?

I think, the next time I have an important project finished, I will remember this story and follow Quincy Jones’ advice. 

How about you?

Thanks for stopping by.  Stay tuned…

Joan Koerber-Walker