Bigger better bolder leadership key slider

Editor's Notes

• #4: Share the program by looking at four questions about leadership and building your leadership
• #5: Analysis via interviews with managers, HR leaders, 360 survey, personality profiles.Two clear categories: failed to achieve results or lost trustUnderneath that, four patterns emerged:Failure to build team or teamwork – lack of organization savvyLow EQ: lack of self insight, inability to build trust, poor listenerInability to build capable performersLow Executive PresenceLacks maturity, composure, unprofessional communicationInability to engage in conflict constructively(can you see how this factor could impact results or trust?)Lacks strength in Strategy AND ExecutionToo conceptual or too tacticalInability to decide and act in a timely manner (too late or too soon)Inability to anticipate and deal with problems early/ difficulty in dealing with ambiguityDidn’t successfully negotiate and grow through transition/change50% of cases, new job, new role, now challenges, new bossWhat counted before didn’t matter as much and what didn’t matter before was now importantWeaknesses or underdeveloped skillsets became importantApplied old methods to new challenges.Developed cracks in characterUnhealthy self interest/internal competition, loss of credibility, poor judgment
• #6: Focus of study was on Directors and Officers who, during the period of 2007 to present, either:Involuntarily left GMISaw a significant (2 column) drop in potential as noted in the P&OR 9-blocksInternational employees in scope of study for first time in 2010Reviewed 19 individual instances of derailmentData was collected on derailment factors using the following sources of qualitative and quantitative data:Interviews with the employee’s boss and/or HR VP/Director who were involved in the decision to terminate the employee Talent Summary data from annual P&OR process (2007-2010)Overall, two themes emerged from the study: our leaders derailed either because they failed to achieve results or achieved results in a destructive fashion. The most recent findings had a equal balance of either theme.When probing beyond this “surface cause” we found six patterns of derailment. Each derailed executive had one or more of the following:Lack org savvy – failed to effectively influence across the organization to solve problems and achieve results.Lacked Exec Presence – a subset of the org savvy issue leaders also acted in very unprofessional ways which compounded the issue, such as being too emotional, negative or overly focused on blaming vs. solving problems.Hasn’t selected or developed a strong team – some leaders did not attract, select or invest to build direct report skills and abilities. In some cases ,the leader seemed to want to be the star and didn’t allow others to shine. This caused many issues, including the inability to deliver results over time because his or her team lacked the competence to perform.Lacks Strength in key skill – Some derailed exec didn’t have a job specific skill that became a performance issue, such as business planning.Lacks strength in both strategy and execution – one specific skill gap was a lack of complementary leadership strengths in strategy/vision and execution. Either the leader could see the future but not put an action plan in place or over focused on execution and didn’t lead innovation or have a higher level view of where the team needed to go.Cracks in Character – in a few cases, the leader had all the right job competencies and performance track record, but stepped over the ethical line and violated an important General Mills policy or value.
• #7: Focus of study was on Directors and Officers who, during the period of 2007 to present, either:Involuntarily left GMISaw a significant (2 column) drop in potential as noted in the P&OR 9-blocksInternational employees in scope of study for first time in 2010Reviewed 19 individual instances of derailmentData was collected on derailment factors using the following sources of qualitative and quantitative data:Interviews with the employee’s boss and/or HR VP/Director who were involved in the decision to terminate the employee Talent Summary data from annual P&OR process (2007-2010)Overall, two themes emerged from the study: our leaders derailed either because they failed to achieve results or achieved results in a destructive fashion. The most recent findings had a equal balance of either theme.When probing beyond this “surface cause” we found six patterns of derailment. Each derailed executive had one or more of the following:Lack org savvy – failed to effectively influence across the organization to solve problems and achieve results.Lacked Exec Presence – a subset of the org savvy issue leaders also acted in very unprofessional ways which compounded the issue, such as being too emotional, negative or overly focused on blaming vs. solving problems.Hasn’t selected or developed a strong team – some leaders did not attract, select or invest to build direct report skills and abilities. In some cases ,the leader seemed to want to be the star and didn’t allow others to shine. This caused many issues, including the inability to deliver results over time because his or her team lacked the competence to perform.Lacks Strength in key skill – Some derailed exec didn’t have a job specific skill that became a performance issue, such as business planning.Lacks strength in both strategy and execution – one specific skill gap was a lack of complementary leadership strengths in strategy/vision and execution. Either the leader could see the future but not put an action plan in place or over focused on execution and didn’t lead innovation or have a higher level view of where the team needed to go.Cracks in Character – in a few cases, the leader had all the right job competencies and performance track record, but stepped over the ethical line and violated an important General Mills policy or value.
• #8: Transitions are a big reason derailment surfaces.Look at a career as the progression of 3 needed skillsets.Importance changes over time – especially in transiton.
• #9: Examples of three shiftsWhat is expected to performWhat makes a difference to advanceQuestion: Which ones do you role demand now? What is less important now and more so later?
• #11: Note: Build slideAnalysis via interviews with managers, HR leaders, 360 survey, personality profiles.Two clear categories: failed to achieve results or lost trustUnderneath that, four patterns emerged:Failure to build team or teamwork – lack of organization savvyLow EQ: lack of self insight, inability to build trust, poor listenerInability to build capable performersLow Executive PresenceLacks maturity, composure, unprofessional communicationInability to engage in conflict constructively(can you see how this factor could impact results or trust?)Lacks strength in Strategy AND ExecutionToo conceptual or too tacticalInability to decide and act in a timely manner (too late or too soon)Inability to anticipate and deal with problems early/ difficulty in dealing with ambiguityDidn’t successfully negotiate and grow through transition/change50% of cases, new job, new role, now challenges, new bossWhat counted before didn’t matter as much and what didn’t matter before was now importantWeaknesses or underdeveloped skillsets became importantApplied old methods to new challenges.Developed cracks in characterUnhealthy self interest/internal competition, loss of credibility, poor judgmentNote to add an example or two … quotes from interviews
• #12: Share the program by looking at four questions about leadership and building your leadership
• #15: The threshold is high for this… i.e. John Doe is well known as a person who sets VERY CLEAR direction – it is a well understood towering strength.
• #16: Share the program by looking at four questions about leadership and building your leadership
• #27: Share the program by looking at four questions about leadership and building your leadership