Managing Leadership^®

Inside draw

We have discussed recently the importance of developing talent within your organization, and of drawing from it when openings appear - especially at the top and in initiatives of special significance to the firm. It appears that boards have twigged to this, as well: according to this WSJ item, just two years ago almost half of CEO picks were for outsiders, but this figure dropped to just 15% the following - last - year. All indications are that this trend will continue this year. As the article points out, “Hiring an outsider is often a board’s admission that it has failed to complete a key task - identifying and grooming the next generation of leaders.” Perhaps boards are growing up, but there’s a lot to do, yet; more on that soon.

Corrupted competition

Nearly 10% of the students in the 2008 MBA class at Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business have been accused of cheating on an exam for a core course in the curriculum. What’s more, it was a take-home, open book exam. According to the BusinessWeek item reporting this incident, it is symptomatic of a larger problem: fifty six percent of graduate school business students admit to cheating in school last year, as opposed to 47% of non-business students. Solidly over half does seem like there is some form of systemic problem among these groups of management trainees (although nearly half of all students doesn’t bode well for the professionals in this generation, overall). It is often too easy to find larger lessons to be learned in every incident that makes its way into the news, but this one may be begging for a closer examination of the underlying causes than overly-facile recourse to excuses like hyper-competitive environments.

Revolt against the “change agents”

Much has been made about the importance of being able to change in order to stay ahead of the competition, and of developing a sort of Über-leader who has evolved into an “agent of change.” Combine this with the cache of chaos theory as some simplistically apply it to management and organizations, and you often wind up with an ethos of change for change’s sake. This is particularly dangerous when applied by managers struggling to stand out. But, according to this item in Management-Issues, many of the leaders who fall prey to this fad are failing, some due to resistance in the ranks to poor initiatives, poorly executed. The item has more than its share of faddishly correct jargon, but should be read anyway for the insight that is to be found hidden among it.

Entrepreneurs and economies: a leg up

The NYT reports on an interesting initiative, a potentially intelligent modification of the business incubator concept employed by some investors specializing in start-ups. This one is designed not just to encourage entrepreneurial activity and support it until it can find its own legs, but to do so in parts of the US that are under-performing in economic activity in general, and new business formation in particular. The system was started by an academic and a consultant, and is supported by successful entrepreneurs offering their experienced advice and services as general managers and coaches. The initiative is compared to a farm-system used in sports, designed to provide basic training, real-world experience, and a chance to be spotted for the big-time.

Problems and solutions in management can come from unexpected quarters. There are no fixed formulas for preventing the one or assuring the other - often all we can do is stay alert for them and try to figure out which is which before the development runs away from us. If we’re honest about it, sometimes we may have to admit that management really is about learning to be better, just by increments, in discerning those trend changes closer and closer to their inception; being in on their creation alone doesn’t guarantee the nature of the fruit they produce.

—

Did you subscribe yet? Why not take just a moment and do it now?

—

Technorati Tags: chaos theory, WSJ, Business Week, NYT, Boards, CEOs, Management-Issues