LEADING THOUGHTS

Alas the “glass ceiling” is one of those sad facts of modern organizational life that knows no national boundaries.  Doesn’t matter the country: despite rising female labour participation rates, women can’t seem to crack senior management ranks.

There are the usual reasons: the lack of transparency around promotion policies; work-family conflict; the old boys’ network; and the lack of visibly successful female role models. In her study of female managers in Ireland, Christine Cross (U Limerick) found similar dynamics at play but also what she calls an under-appreciated phenomenon: that “visibility” or being known to the senior management team is a crucial “career progression strategy.”

It is a strategy for which women of a certain age are ill-equipped, Cross says. “The age during which women are most often taking time out of their career for childbirth coincides with the time they are most active in seeking promotion,” she writes in the Leadership & Organization Development Journal. “As a consequence of taking maternity leave, a woman’s absence from the organisation directly impacts her visibility in organisational life. This study highlights that where women are away from the office for these extended periods, they believe, because of their absence, they are ‘forgotten about’ by the senior management team.”

Cross’s conclusions are based on in-depth interviews with 30 female managers from across a wide range of industry sectors in Ireland. The women in the study also observed that men in their organizations overtly engaged in self-generated visibility, a strategy the female respondents did not want to employ.

Hmm. . . do you buy that?

I have seen the way some men network and it’s not a pretty sight. Everyone knows they are doing it, just to get in with the ‘in crowd’. People talk about them behind their backs about how they are always smoozing up to the most senior people, and there is this one guy who is really junior, but wants to hang out with the ‘big boys’. But it’s working for him, even though we are all saying he shouldn’t be doing it because he’s making a laughing stock of himself.
—Retail store manager quoted by Cross

“Barriers to the executive suite: evidence from Ireland”, by Christine Cross; Leadership & Organization Development Journal (Vol. 31 No. 2, 2010, pp. 104-119)

photo credit: Let Ideas Compete

You’re flush with excitement because you’ve just hired an industry high flier. How can you make sure that your new star employee isn’t a flash in the pan?

Top-notch talents do not automatically perform at high levels, say Groysberg (Harvard Business School), Lee (RiskMetrics Group), and Abrahams (Harvard Business School). Writing in the MIT Sloan Management Review, they offer advice on how to get the best out of the best.

Their main point is that “star” hires perform at their peak when surrounded by colleagues of similar talent. As proof, they point to a study they performed among equity analysts who benefited (as did their customers) by working with sharp portfolio strategists and salespeople.

Why is this so? It turns out that high-quality colleagues act as sources of information, provide insightful feedback, serve as valuable interfaces between knowledge workers and clients, and enhance the reputation of their star colleagues.

This management strategy also leads to higher retention of the top performers, the authors state. “The goal here is the so-called Matthew effect: The more stars a company has, the easier it is to develop and retain such high-caliber individuals.”

Three other pieces of advice:

:: Avoid lavishing high salaries on your new star hire; doing so risks demoralizing co-workers. In fact, the authors write, high achievers may be willing to accept a pay cut for the opportunity to work with similarly talented employees.

:: Stars may not have the instinct to play well with others, especially when managerial time and resources are scarce and the urge to compete is greatest. Managers should therefore create a culture of collaboration by encouraging face-to-face contact and building a compensation package that rewards appropriate behaviour.

:: Don’t neglect home-grown talent. By developing high potentials from within and building bench strength, you will be rewarded with greater loyalty and less disruption when a key person leaves.

“What it Takes to Make ‘Star’ Hires Pay Off”, by Boris Groysberg, Linda-Eling Lee, and Robin Abrahams; MIT Sloan Management Review (Vol. 51, No. 2, Winter 2010, pp. 57-61)

photo credit: Noel Feans

As head of the world’s largest confectioner, Cadbury CEO Todd Stitzer has plenty of challenges, not least of which is leading a multinational corporation that retains some of its Quaker culture. In this interview with INSEAD, Stitzer discusses his own leadership journey, managing through a “de-merger” and downsizing, waging a war for talent, and maintaining your sanity.

Go straight to the 4:20 mark, where Stitzer talks about the split between Cadbury and Schweppes.

At 6:38 he explains his messaging to employees going through a major downsizing.

At 8:50 he discusses the still prevalent Quaker culture, and the tension between high performance and social responsibility.

At 10:12 Stitzer reveals the Cadbury approach to talent management. Factoid: over the past five years, about 30 percent of the top 150 employees changed positions.

At the 12:00 mark he discusses the qualities he looks for in a leader: selflessness and high engagement (a willingness to “invest in accomplishment”).

And at 14:15 Stitizer gives his recipe for work-life balance: not playing golf with the boys on Saturday mornings.

Today’s organizational principles are based on the idea that the workforce is shaped like a pyramid, with many young people at the base, a medium number of mid-career workers in the middle, and fewer older workers at the top. In reality, the workforce is beginning to look more like a rectangle with nearly the same number of workers at each life stage, writes Tamara J. Erickson, president of nGenera Innovation Network in the journal People & Strategy.

Given this reality, Erickson asks a number of provocative questions regarding organizational design:

Is it time to redesign career paths for lateral moves, with less dependence on promotion? Tie variety, recognition, learning, and compensation to the development of capabilities that are not necessarily related to hierarchy.

Do we need titles and, if so, for what purpose? Titles that clarify the function a person performs are essential; titles that recognize movement up the org chart are less so.

Does a career need to be continuous and linear? Provide employees with the opportunity to leave and re-enter the workforce.

How long should we expect people to stay in one job or even in one company? Redesign jobs to accommodate frequent movement and short tenures per role.

Should we redefine work in terms of tasks rather than time? Have employees put in only as much time as it actually takes to get the work done, and remove the need to keep regular hours or show up at the office each day.

How can you ensure employees are choosing you? Find ways to let prospective employees understand for themselves what it is like to work in your organization, and then encourage the prospective employee to evaluate the fit.

Redesigning Your Organization for the Future of Work, by Tamara J. Erickson; People & Strategy (Human Resource Planning Society, Vol. 31, Issue 4)

Email me for a copy of this paper: Alan [at] AlanMorantz.com

photo credit: Engin Erdogan