Take us to your Leader... Beam me up, Scotty!

..and a hundred other pithy, nonsensical phrases and statements that clutter our day.

None more ridiculous and colossally undefined, however, as my personal favorite, and one I hear frequently as a consultant to senior leadership:

Take us to the next level.

What??

What level??

How do you/we know what's next??

In the memorable words of Samuel Gompers (early union guy), when asked what worker's really wanted, he replied, more. Is that all we're talking about here? More?

I don't get this "next level" stuff.

If we start with strategy, and define strategy as the purposeful, planned, vision of our future, and we attempt to create a working plan to achieve that future state... what, then is "the next level" in that context?

I've known businesses that successfully and substantially improved their quality of earnings while reducing or flattening revenue growth. Is that "next level?"

I've known CEOs who were incredibly intelligent, capable of personally developing, creating, and driving toward a purposeful strategy far different than the organization's current direction and comfort. Is that the "next level?

Here's a thought... how about we stick to block-and-tackling, even when it involves strategy and long-term change. We aren't seeking a next level, we're driving toward the direction, successes and results that we pre-determined through visionary strategy and on-the-ground leadership.

Now, if we weren't doing any of that stuff before -- maybe it is the "next level."

But I don't think so.

KB

Kevin Berchelmann
www.triangleperformance.com

Fish or fowl?

Fish or fowl? Black or white? Day or night?

We frequently find ourselves arguing whether human resources -- as a function -- is a true business partner in the strict financial sense or an employee advocate in the most liberal sense.

We're wasting our time arguing semantics and methodology. Our resources are better spent discussing and acting on results.

First, let's get some clear definitions and positioning. Is the human resources executive the do-all, end-all example of goodness and perfect behavior in the organization? Of course not. No single person or function is solely responsible for our organziations' moral compass. We are, however, the keeper of that compass, like it or not.

It's simple logic, not the soft, intangible, transactional focus that many embrace. As human resource executives, we are primary agents of organziational and behavior change -- it's what we do. As focal points for change, we become the defacto example for that desired behavior. Sorry, but there is a modicum of "glass house" while leading human resources.

This doesn't mean we are, necessarily, this "employee advocate" that so many speak about. It simply means that we must be exemplify and model the very behaviors we hope to see in an organziation. Yes, to some degree, that's every executive's charge. But again, we may not be the moral compass of our organization, yet we are surely the keeper of same.

So what, you say? Here's "what:" We must be true business partners in every sense. Our goals must always be the organization's goals -- no exceptions. Within legal and ethical boundaries, we should be prepared to do whatever is necessary to support our firm's vision and direction with personal conviction. This is non-negotiable. In addition, we must always recognize that -- like it or not -- employees (managers and executives often included) look to us for positive, correct examples of desired behavior.

Let's make sure we set that positive, correct example.

KB

Kevin Berchelmann
www.triangleperformance.com

Across the Board isn't enough...

So, with CPIs hovering around 3-3.5%, and most surveys showing 3.5-4.0% increases in salary budgets for 2007, life's a breeze, right? Just add the percentages into the Excel formula, press "Enter," and you're done, right?

Actually, wrong.

Enter "wage inflation."

I'm going to avoid the ecomomist argument that higher wages do or do not cause inflation. That's just not our relative concern here. What is clearly our concern is that our currently strong economic growth lowers general unemployment rate. This, theoretically, can cause businesses to bid up the price of labor and (hopefully) pass through those higher costs in the form of higher prices.

If only it were so easy. As the CPI shows general inflationary trends (e.g., our product/service cost increases), wage inflation is an additional cost on top of inflationary pricing. In other words, it's a potential incremental cost.

Now, again theoretically, profit-conscious firms aren't going to hire employees at a rate of pay more than his utilitarian or marginal value, or more than the additional revenue earned. Hardly rocket science, right?

The reality, however, shows that sometimes wages do increase faster than general inflation, particularly for individual functions, positions and/or jobs, rather than an overall employment market.

Enter compensation planning. It's easy to get in a cyclical rut: analyze the jobs, survey the market, establish a range. Then adjust for infation a couple of years and start all over again. That's simply not enough. We must pay close, specific attention to the inflationary movement of key positions within our organziations and adjust accordingly -- or at least be acutely aware of the disparity. No reason for a surprise here.

Sometimes compensation planning takes foresight, analysis, and a real awareness of what's going on in the world.

Don't get caught napping...

KB

Kevin Berchelmann
www.triangleperformance.com

Leadership Squared

Leaders leading leaders... "Leadership Squared."

I recently was at a board meeting, and the chair took a few minutes to recognize one of the directors (we'll call her Linda). Instead of typical platitudes and nameless accolades, this chairman instead described this person in the highest possible manner. Taking some time to address the difficulties of leadership, the challenges we face today, and the issues confronting us as we lead our organizations, he finished with the ultimate compliment:

"Linda excels at the most difficult -- she's a leader of leaders.

Leading is hard, we all know that. Some of us can make it look easier than others, but we know we are just fooling the masses... it's hard, takes work, thought, and purposeful action. Leading an organziation can be nearly thankless and fraught with issue -- some trivial, some extreme. The most important thing we do isn't managing earnings, driving new products/services to market, or even finding and developing "A" players (and I've weighed in on my feelings there).

The most important thing we do -- defined by significance, impact, and long-term results, is leading leaders.

We set the stage, we act as the example, and we provide resources and break down obstacles. Then we get out of their way and let them lead. There is no higher purpose in leading an organization than ensuring your leaders can lead.

Help them, nurture them, even get out of their way at times... but lead your leaders. That's how we get where we're going.

KB

Kevin Berchelmann
www.triangleperformance.com