It is unusual to see an article on this most practical of topics which rarely gets the attention it deserves. Perhaps we at MTP feel this way because, in most cases, the venues for our courses are chosen by our clients and generally the standard is good. However from time to time there are disasters that could have been avoided by more careful selection. Often when our team gets together, the conversation will end up with the sharing of horror stories that we have experienced over the years.
Though the article contains a number of statements of the blindingly obvious – and some padding to get up to the obligatory ten tips – the article is worth reading. The simple point made at the beginning is true and obvious but often forgotten; the consequences of things going wrong can be so serious – particularly if senior management are around – that the choice of venue is not a decision to be taken lightly.
One simple suggestion is to check out the levels of satisfaction from previous users, not just to read the published testimonials but to pick up the phone and ask the questions that really matter, like how helpful are the staff and how do they respond to a crisis? For instance, is there a business centre for emergency copying when the papers are short or get lost?
Another piece of practical advice is to avoid being carried away by the ambience of an impressive venue and thus forget to ask the more practical questions about the facilities available. This point is connected with another helpful piece of advice, to make sure that you are clear on your objectives and priorities before starting the selection process.
An impressive ambience may be important of the event is of a prestigious nature with attendees who need to be made to feel important. On the other hand it may give the wrong impression if times are hard and the requirement is more routine. Similarly a London venue may be important if there are attendees from overseas who need to be occupied during evenings and weekends but a distraction for a local audience.
For those who do not get time to read the article fully, here’s an abbreviated version of the checklist:
• Make easy access a high priority
• Match venue to objective
• Match venue to audience
• Research thoroughly
• Don’t get swept along by the ambience
• Assess crisis management capability
There is also a suggestion that, where you are using a venue on a regular basis, you should consider changing from time to time, to keep them on their toes and to refresh the event. I found myself disagreeing with this, perhaps because of my conservative nature and the experience of so many sub-standard venues over the years. The other point of view is – if you find the right place and the standards are consistently high – stick with it!
To access this article go to http://www.personneltoday.com/articles/2009/08/04/51546/conference-venues-10-tips-on-finding-the-perfect-venue.html
Thursday 3 September 2009
How to manage your negotiating team, by Joanna Brett, Kristin Behfar and Ray Friedman, Harvard Business Review, August 2009
This article is at a relatively practical and down to earth level for the HBR and seems to be relevant to an increasing number of our clients. There was a time when negotiating teams mainly featured as part of major acquisitions and contract deals but now we see them increasingly as part of day to day business life.
Consumer goods companies send cross-functional teams to talk to retailer customers about next year’s terms of trade. Companies pitching for major contracts can no longer rely on one to one personal relationships but find Finance, IT and Procurement Departments becoming involved; their response has to be to fight fire with fire by sending in their own cross-functional team.
This article confirms the point that we have often made in our sessions on negotiations – that the more people you include in a negotiating team, the more difficult it is to coordinate and the more likely it is for things to go wrong. But if a multi-functional approach is essential, then something has to be done to make coordination as effective as possible.
The article is based on research into 45 negotiating teams and the results showed that the biggest challenges normally come from ‘their own side of the table’. The two key challenges are aligning the conflicting interests of the different team members and implementing a disciplined process during the negotiation itself. The finance person is likely to focus on costs and the marketer on quality so they must agree the right balance before the key meetings, not during the negotiations.
As with all things in negotiation, the answer is preparation, part of which must be the opening up of all the potential conflicts. Agreement of the overall business objective, discussion of the different priorities and internal trade-offs, must all be hammered out beforehand. In other words the internal negotiation must precede the external negotiation so that there are no signs of disunity.
The article sometimes seems to be better at highlighting the problems rather than finding solutions but identifying the problem may be enough in some cases to save companies from potential disaster. The solutions may be something that each company has to work out in its own unique context. However there were a few interesting suggestions of ways to improve:
•Where you have control over team selection, look for those who have good cross-functional relationships, which may be more important than negotiating skills
•Invite senior managers and other key influencers to planning sessions
•The team leader to carry out facilitation and bargaining outside meetings to ensure that all hidden agendas come out
I would have added one further simple question – does everybody have to be there? Cross-functional involvement does not have to mean attendance at every meeting; the planning discussions should agree clarity of roles and this should in turn lead to agreement on the optimum number to achieve the objectives.
Altogether an interesting and practical article that is worth a read by anyone who has team negotiation as a current issue.
To access this article go to http://hbr.harvardbusiness.org/2009/09/how-to-manage-your-negotiating-team/ar/1
Consumer goods companies send cross-functional teams to talk to retailer customers about next year’s terms of trade. Companies pitching for major contracts can no longer rely on one to one personal relationships but find Finance, IT and Procurement Departments becoming involved; their response has to be to fight fire with fire by sending in their own cross-functional team.
This article confirms the point that we have often made in our sessions on negotiations – that the more people you include in a negotiating team, the more difficult it is to coordinate and the more likely it is for things to go wrong. But if a multi-functional approach is essential, then something has to be done to make coordination as effective as possible.
The article is based on research into 45 negotiating teams and the results showed that the biggest challenges normally come from ‘their own side of the table’. The two key challenges are aligning the conflicting interests of the different team members and implementing a disciplined process during the negotiation itself. The finance person is likely to focus on costs and the marketer on quality so they must agree the right balance before the key meetings, not during the negotiations.
As with all things in negotiation, the answer is preparation, part of which must be the opening up of all the potential conflicts. Agreement of the overall business objective, discussion of the different priorities and internal trade-offs, must all be hammered out beforehand. In other words the internal negotiation must precede the external negotiation so that there are no signs of disunity.
The article sometimes seems to be better at highlighting the problems rather than finding solutions but identifying the problem may be enough in some cases to save companies from potential disaster. The solutions may be something that each company has to work out in its own unique context. However there were a few interesting suggestions of ways to improve:
•Where you have control over team selection, look for those who have good cross-functional relationships, which may be more important than negotiating skills
•Invite senior managers and other key influencers to planning sessions
•The team leader to carry out facilitation and bargaining outside meetings to ensure that all hidden agendas come out
I would have added one further simple question – does everybody have to be there? Cross-functional involvement does not have to mean attendance at every meeting; the planning discussions should agree clarity of roles and this should in turn lead to agreement on the optimum number to achieve the objectives.
Altogether an interesting and practical article that is worth a read by anyone who has team negotiation as a current issue.
To access this article go to http://hbr.harvardbusiness.org/2009/09/how-to-manage-your-negotiating-team/ar/1
Talent Management – key questions for Learning and Development, Sarah Cook and Steve McCaulay, Training Journal, July 2009
This article is like many in the area of Learning and Development; a combination of obvious statements, combined with a few insights that make you want to read on. The first part of the article confirms my initial cynical view that the current emphasis in books and magazines on the buzz phrase ‘Talent Management’ is really nothing new, just a recycling of obvious ideas. Is there really any need for us to be told at such length that there are dangers of not investing in people during a recession?
The article becomes more interesting when it moves on to the practical choices that have to be made. It defines talent management as the strategies and practices needed to identify, develop, attract and retain people of value. In the context of management talent, it then asks the important question – do we identify an elite group who have the highest potential? Or do we cast our net more widely and thus avoid the danger of a de-motivated under-class?
As with the Harvard article, the authors seem to be better at asking good questions rather than answering them; other key questions are – do we make the process fully transparent within the organisation? Do we involve the individuals in the choices that have to be made or make plans on their behalf? Though it is right that these questions can only be answered in the context of each company’s culture and HR strategy, it would have been good to receive more guidance on the factors that determine the answers.
One area where a definite view is put forward is in the identification of talent; the authors believe that the ability to learn and develop should be a key factor in any person who is singled out for talent management, a necessary condition. They also believe that those chosen should be provided with a personal coach to help him or her manage personal development.
Three key areas of this development are identified – strategic awareness, personal effectiveness and career management – and the point is made that the plans must be more than attending courses. A flexible menu of secondments, projects, assignments and personal study should be arranged.
The article ends with a helpful checklist of questions for the L & D person to ask around talent management. This is the first contribution of a series of three and more answers may come during the next two articles. But somehow I doubt it!
To access this article go to http://www.trainingjournal.com/tj/2262.html
The article becomes more interesting when it moves on to the practical choices that have to be made. It defines talent management as the strategies and practices needed to identify, develop, attract and retain people of value. In the context of management talent, it then asks the important question – do we identify an elite group who have the highest potential? Or do we cast our net more widely and thus avoid the danger of a de-motivated under-class?
As with the Harvard article, the authors seem to be better at asking good questions rather than answering them; other key questions are – do we make the process fully transparent within the organisation? Do we involve the individuals in the choices that have to be made or make plans on their behalf? Though it is right that these questions can only be answered in the context of each company’s culture and HR strategy, it would have been good to receive more guidance on the factors that determine the answers.
One area where a definite view is put forward is in the identification of talent; the authors believe that the ability to learn and develop should be a key factor in any person who is singled out for talent management, a necessary condition. They also believe that those chosen should be provided with a personal coach to help him or her manage personal development.
Three key areas of this development are identified – strategic awareness, personal effectiveness and career management – and the point is made that the plans must be more than attending courses. A flexible menu of secondments, projects, assignments and personal study should be arranged.
The article ends with a helpful checklist of questions for the L & D person to ask around talent management. This is the first contribution of a series of three and more answers may come during the next two articles. But somehow I doubt it!
To access this article go to http://www.trainingjournal.com/tj/2262.html
FDs take the tiller, by Alastair Dryburgh, Management Today, June 2009
This article is typical of those in Management Today; short, easy to read, some good points but could have been so much more valuable.
It starts with the statement that there has been a recent trend for CFOs to be promoted to CEOs. There is no statistical analysis to justify this statement but it ties in with my own perceptions and the list of recent examples is convincing – Shell, BSkyB, Ford and BT.
There is then an examination of the reasons why and the point is made that the current economic conditions are the main driving force, as strategies change from growth to consolidation, from acquisition to retrenchment. It would have been interesting to follow this point up further by asking the obvious further question – what about when things turn up again? Won’t these companies be stuck with the wrong type of leader?
There are some other suggested reasons for the CFO’s elevation that are quite contentious; one is that the CFO is the only other director apart from the CEO who ‘can see the business as a whole’. There might be some Marketing or Planning Directors who would challenge this view! More convincing is that the CFO has the advantage of being close to the scorecard and therefore speaks the language of business more convincingly than anyone else.
Another suggestion is that the CFO has the closest relationship with the CEO and, if this is handled successfully and harmoniously, this will make the CFO the obvious person to take over. More questionable is the view that the CFO is the educator of the business and will be in a strong position because of his or her ability to communicate about financial matters. This may be an ideal but not always the reality in my experience.
I was just thinking that the article had missed the most important factor of all when it was made via a case study that supports the article. Michael Queen of 3i is an example of a CFO promoted to CEO and he quotes the key factor as being the CFO’s high profile with shareholders and external analysts, whose views are important when the CEO selection is made. If they have the confidence of the Stock Market, their appointment will have the right impact on share price.
It would have been good to have more examples like Queen to support the article. The other two case studies are interesting but hardly relevant to the arguments being made. Articles from Management Today are sometimes on well chosen topics and make many valid points but often give the impression of being superficial rush jobs. Such a well regarded magazine should do better.
To access this article go to http://www.managementtoday.co.uk/news/915848
It starts with the statement that there has been a recent trend for CFOs to be promoted to CEOs. There is no statistical analysis to justify this statement but it ties in with my own perceptions and the list of recent examples is convincing – Shell, BSkyB, Ford and BT.
There is then an examination of the reasons why and the point is made that the current economic conditions are the main driving force, as strategies change from growth to consolidation, from acquisition to retrenchment. It would have been interesting to follow this point up further by asking the obvious further question – what about when things turn up again? Won’t these companies be stuck with the wrong type of leader?
There are some other suggested reasons for the CFO’s elevation that are quite contentious; one is that the CFO is the only other director apart from the CEO who ‘can see the business as a whole’. There might be some Marketing or Planning Directors who would challenge this view! More convincing is that the CFO has the advantage of being close to the scorecard and therefore speaks the language of business more convincingly than anyone else.
Another suggestion is that the CFO has the closest relationship with the CEO and, if this is handled successfully and harmoniously, this will make the CFO the obvious person to take over. More questionable is the view that the CFO is the educator of the business and will be in a strong position because of his or her ability to communicate about financial matters. This may be an ideal but not always the reality in my experience.
I was just thinking that the article had missed the most important factor of all when it was made via a case study that supports the article. Michael Queen of 3i is an example of a CFO promoted to CEO and he quotes the key factor as being the CFO’s high profile with shareholders and external analysts, whose views are important when the CEO selection is made. If they have the confidence of the Stock Market, their appointment will have the right impact on share price.
It would have been good to have more examples like Queen to support the article. The other two case studies are interesting but hardly relevant to the arguments being made. Articles from Management Today are sometimes on well chosen topics and make many valid points but often give the impression of being superficial rush jobs. Such a well regarded magazine should do better.
To access this article go to http://www.managementtoday.co.uk/news/915848
Management candidate? Take them for a drive to meet a horse, Fran Tindall, Training Journal, May 2009
I carried this article over from the last update when there were many other more weighty articles competing for space. I confess to a certain bias here because my choice of wife has meant that horses have been a big part of my life and made me significantly poorer than I might otherwise have been!
My first reaction was that this must be some kind of joke. But apparently there is some logic around the idea.
If you want to know if that person you are planning to recruit is really the type of person they say they are, you should get them to meet a horse. The theory is that, just as a person’s driving may reveal their true instincts and behaviour, a person’s attitudes to animals will reveal similar hidden traits. Apparently ‘one business leader’ – whose quote was less impressive because it was anonymous – insists on contriving situations where candidates drive a car and meet dogs and horses before a final selection is made.
The theory is that you can fool people but you can’t fool animals; they can smell anxiety, fear, stress and authenticity. Also, we do not cover things up when dealing with animals, they see us without the usual gloss that we put on ourselves, particularly when looking to impress potential recruiters.
It was here that I parted company with the reasoning behind the idea. I confess to being biased because, apart from the way they give pleasure to my family, I have no positive feelings at all towards animals. I also confess that my driving leaves something to be desired, to some extent revealing the worst features of my character.
But isn’t working in business about managing behaviour and, to some extent, hiding your innate tendencies? Do we really care about our employees’ hidden traits if they manage to overcome them in their work environment? We often hear about people who are totally different at work compared to home – dominant in the job but henpecked in marriage, and vice-versa.
Nevertheless, this is an interesting article that does not need to be taken too seriously but is good for sparking off an interesting debate, by the water cooler or over the dinner table.
Note from the blogger’s family (supported by horses and various other dogs, hens, hamsters and snakes). They believe that there is much truth in the article and that the blogger’s views are prejudiced by all the cheques he writes!!!
To access this article go to http://www.trainingjournal.com/tj/2120.html
My first reaction was that this must be some kind of joke. But apparently there is some logic around the idea.
If you want to know if that person you are planning to recruit is really the type of person they say they are, you should get them to meet a horse. The theory is that, just as a person’s driving may reveal their true instincts and behaviour, a person’s attitudes to animals will reveal similar hidden traits. Apparently ‘one business leader’ – whose quote was less impressive because it was anonymous – insists on contriving situations where candidates drive a car and meet dogs and horses before a final selection is made.
The theory is that you can fool people but you can’t fool animals; they can smell anxiety, fear, stress and authenticity. Also, we do not cover things up when dealing with animals, they see us without the usual gloss that we put on ourselves, particularly when looking to impress potential recruiters.
It was here that I parted company with the reasoning behind the idea. I confess to being biased because, apart from the way they give pleasure to my family, I have no positive feelings at all towards animals. I also confess that my driving leaves something to be desired, to some extent revealing the worst features of my character.
But isn’t working in business about managing behaviour and, to some extent, hiding your innate tendencies? Do we really care about our employees’ hidden traits if they manage to overcome them in their work environment? We often hear about people who are totally different at work compared to home – dominant in the job but henpecked in marriage, and vice-versa.
Nevertheless, this is an interesting article that does not need to be taken too seriously but is good for sparking off an interesting debate, by the water cooler or over the dinner table.
Note from the blogger’s family (supported by horses and various other dogs, hens, hamsters and snakes). They believe that there is much truth in the article and that the blogger’s views are prejudiced by all the cheques he writes!!!
To access this article go to http://www.trainingjournal.com/tj/2120.html
‘The Goal’ by Eliyahu M Goldratt and Jeff Cox, published by North River Press (still available on Amazon)
I must confess to a vested interest in the Goal as it was the inspiration for me to start writing my own business novels which led to the Bottom Line series by Gower and several commissions for tailored versions from BP, Unilever and Barclays. I do not claim however to have reached anything like the standard – or the sales – of Goldratt’s original, though I can argue that he had the benefit of an experienced novel writer to support him.
On second reading, this book passes the test of time pretty well, both in terms of style and content. It achieves the remarkable feat – which I tried to replicate – of making you want to carry on reading at the end of each chapter, not an easy task or a normal scenario for a business book.
The other impressive aspect of the book is that, contrary to my recollection from reading it years ago, it does more than cover the theory of constraints which, some might argue, is of interest to only a limited audience. There is also some good stuff on financial measures and the need to cascade down from overall corporate performance to the variables controlled by management, which the book suggests are throughput, inventory and operating costs. The important point is also made that these must be seen as integrated metrics, not as separate indicators.
The chapter where the hero achieves his breakthrough in thinking through watching his son’s Boy Scout troop march through the countryside is as simple but powerful as ever and the quality of writing is particularly high. Maybe it is not high enough to justify sales of three million copies (compared to my measly total of not much more than thirty thousand) but still a brilliant idea and the start of things to come.
It is interesting that, in the 100 best business books, there are five novels (not including mine of course) and The Goal can clearly claim to have started a trend and created a new genre. If you haven’t read the Goal and are interested to see how a novel can educate, I recommend that you go on Amazon to buy a copy.
On second reading, this book passes the test of time pretty well, both in terms of style and content. It achieves the remarkable feat – which I tried to replicate – of making you want to carry on reading at the end of each chapter, not an easy task or a normal scenario for a business book.
The other impressive aspect of the book is that, contrary to my recollection from reading it years ago, it does more than cover the theory of constraints which, some might argue, is of interest to only a limited audience. There is also some good stuff on financial measures and the need to cascade down from overall corporate performance to the variables controlled by management, which the book suggests are throughput, inventory and operating costs. The important point is also made that these must be seen as integrated metrics, not as separate indicators.
The chapter where the hero achieves his breakthrough in thinking through watching his son’s Boy Scout troop march through the countryside is as simple but powerful as ever and the quality of writing is particularly high. Maybe it is not high enough to justify sales of three million copies (compared to my measly total of not much more than thirty thousand) but still a brilliant idea and the start of things to come.
It is interesting that, in the 100 best business books, there are five novels (not including mine of course) and The Goal can clearly claim to have started a trend and created a new genre. If you haven’t read the Goal and are interested to see how a novel can educate, I recommend that you go on Amazon to buy a copy.
Lessons from Private Equity that any company can use, by Orit Gadiesh and Hugh MacArthur, published by Harvard Business Press
This book is published by Harvard Business Press as part of their ‘Memo to the CEO’ series and the authors are senior people from Bain & Company, the prestigious management consultants who run their own Private Equity practice.
Private Equity (PE) has a bad image, some of it deserved and some less so. In the criticism of the extortionate amounts of money made by Private Equity investors who take over, turn round and then sell companies, it is often forgotten than many fail, particularly in the current downturn.
This book draws on another fact that is also often lost among the ill-informed criticism, that the PE operators are often only doing what the previous management didn’t want, or weren’t able, to do; to make the company more efficient and value creating. The authors therefore argue that if companies adopt the same practices before the PE operators can get their hands on them, they will keep their jobs and reward their shareholders.
The main headings of the potential for performance improvement are:
• Defining the full potential of the business through fact based analysis
• Developing what they call a blueprint; effectively a 3 to 5 year plan with a few (not to many) major initiatives
• Accelerating performance, monitored by a few key metrics
• Harnessing the high performing management talent (and sometimes taking it elsewhere when the turnaround has been achieved) and rewarding them well
• Making the assets sweat
• Creating a results oriented mindset
There is an interesting harmony with the messages of The Goal, in that the book recommends simple measures which drive cash flow and shareholder value. They look primarily at EBITDA (effectively operating profit before depreciation) and then monitor three other KPIs that impact cash flow – increases in working capital, investments in capital expenditure and the cost of servicing debt. If all these measures are moving the right way, the business will be cash positive and the shareholders will thrive.
So there is no rocket science about Private Equity. You need the capital backing and the guts to take the risk; then it is all about good business principles.
This is a highly impressive book and I will be reviewing others in the series in future updates to see if this is typical. As you would expect from Harvard it is conceptually strong and rigorous; what I did not expect was such a practical and concise approach. I particularly liked the chapter summaries and the many examples and case studies to illustrate the learning points, all within 126 pocket sized pages.
Private Equity (PE) has a bad image, some of it deserved and some less so. In the criticism of the extortionate amounts of money made by Private Equity investors who take over, turn round and then sell companies, it is often forgotten than many fail, particularly in the current downturn.
This book draws on another fact that is also often lost among the ill-informed criticism, that the PE operators are often only doing what the previous management didn’t want, or weren’t able, to do; to make the company more efficient and value creating. The authors therefore argue that if companies adopt the same practices before the PE operators can get their hands on them, they will keep their jobs and reward their shareholders.
The main headings of the potential for performance improvement are:
• Defining the full potential of the business through fact based analysis
• Developing what they call a blueprint; effectively a 3 to 5 year plan with a few (not to many) major initiatives
• Accelerating performance, monitored by a few key metrics
• Harnessing the high performing management talent (and sometimes taking it elsewhere when the turnaround has been achieved) and rewarding them well
• Making the assets sweat
• Creating a results oriented mindset
There is an interesting harmony with the messages of The Goal, in that the book recommends simple measures which drive cash flow and shareholder value. They look primarily at EBITDA (effectively operating profit before depreciation) and then monitor three other KPIs that impact cash flow – increases in working capital, investments in capital expenditure and the cost of servicing debt. If all these measures are moving the right way, the business will be cash positive and the shareholders will thrive.
So there is no rocket science about Private Equity. You need the capital backing and the guts to take the risk; then it is all about good business principles.
This is a highly impressive book and I will be reviewing others in the series in future updates to see if this is typical. As you would expect from Harvard it is conceptually strong and rigorous; what I did not expect was such a practical and concise approach. I particularly liked the chapter summaries and the many examples and case studies to illustrate the learning points, all within 126 pocket sized pages.