Not Qualified to Manage

In the following video clip, I try to make the case that being an effective manager is not about knowledge, and is not even about skills, but that the crucial element in becoming an effective manager is entering into the role with the right set of attitudes. I also try to make the case that not all of us, in fact, can qualify on those attitudes.

The War For Talent

Apart from his own blog, Bob Sutton has a blog on the Harvard Business School Online Site

(Actually, he co-hosts other blogs as well, but let's not go there because I'm intimidated enough already!)

On the HBS site, he announces that "The War For Talent Is Back" (did it go away?) and offers five lessons for discussion:

1. Superstars are overrated.
2. Great systems are more important than great people.
3. Create smaller rather than larger pay differences between "star" employees and everyone else.
4. The law of crappy people (great people will hire other great people, but mediocre people will hire even worse people because they are threatened by competent people) is probably a myth.
5. The no asshole rule helps.

Here are some of my lessons / propositions for winning the war for talent:

1. In hiring, never let the pursuit of volume get in the way of maintaining the highest possible standards.
2. People want the opportunity to learn and grow: you must actively work to provide a variety of stretching, challenging experiences.
3. Standards of people supervision and management are as important as standards of product or service quality: they should be monitored and enforced in the same way.
4. Firms that try to win by hiring pre-existing, already-formed talent will never do as well as firms that are skilled in building talented people.
5. Talent is over-rated: character and energy count for more.

***

What are some of your lessons for winning the war for talent?

What's Our Deal?

I have a new article on my website called What's Our Deal? It's about "doing strategy" and it begins:

"At a recent conference, I heard a number of successful firm leaders describe how their firms had achieved significant growth and profitability. A common phrase used by each and every one of these firm leaders was "making sure that all the key people were 'on the same page.' "

Clearly, it was important that something was agreed to and shared among the members of these firms. But what? What does "being on the same page" really mean? And how is it done?

To find out my views, you can read the article.

But what are YOUR views?

The Brazen Careerist

Penelope Trunk, a/k/a The Brazen Careerist, writes one of the most enjoyable blogs around.

She writes so well that even if you're not in her target audience (Generation X or Y), or currently in the market for career advice, she's nevertheless worth making a daily habit.

She's also just publishing a book, also called The Brazen Careerist, written in the same attention grabbing, helpful style.

Here, for example, is the opening of one of her chapters:

"Here is a message for people who say they can't stomach office politics: you will die a slow, painful career death."

Essential, fun stuff!

Public and Private

Green Dot Life is a (very) unofficial blog for employees of Deloitte consultants.

Yesterday, this post appeared:

Hi Everyone!

I am considering whether or not to make the leap from Accenture to Big-D (yeah!). Can someone here help me to validate and/or to change this following statements?

1. Since Big-D is not a publically-traded company, it will be more generous than Accenture (a publically-traded company). e.g.

= in salary and the overall compensation packet;

= with expense policies;

= with "office perks" (e.g. beer fridge, snacks)

= with "team / social events"

= Required chargeability targets (e.g. 80% for managers? 90% ?)

= How geenrous the promotion process is -- if there are "lots of bright people, ready for next step" (i.e. not just stopped at the "top 15% performers only")

2. Deloitte probably has more prestige compared to Accenture (i.e. still retaining its "original big-4 image", structure and corporate name), whereas Accenture has a lot more "airtime" and marketing success due to how much it spent on the Tiger Woods ads.

= But those "marketing success / awaress" does not necessarily lead to more revenues, profits or happier share-holders (for Big-D, happier SH's are the Partners).

= Nor does the "prestige" of Deloitte brandname translate to more revenue all the time.

Agree? Please feel free to comment on any of the above proposed statements. THANKS! Hope to be joining you folks at Big-D soon!

Happy Senior Consultant

*****

What do the readers of this blog have to say in response? Would you expect the same differences as this person would between a publicly-traded professional firm and a privately-held partnership?

Managing Works

In this video we're going to explore how management, in a society of professionals, can really be made to work. The clip opens with an example of fabulous management, fabulous coaching, that was done to me early in my career, and contrasts with the sorts of management that we often see, inside professional firms.

Tyrants, Energisers and Cynics -- New strategy podcast episode available now

The ninth episode of my new podcast series, Strategy and the Fat Smoker, is now live and available for download.

It is dedicated to exploring the themes found in my article by the same name.  I encourage you to forward these to friends and associates who may be interested in the topics covered.

With "Tyrants, Energisers and Cynics", we begin to look into problems in management and the factors in business culture that enable them.  With so many approaches an organisation can take to management, only one of these approaches will, in the long run, produce enduring profitability and abundant business generation.  Why are so few firms willing to invest the time?

NOTES FOR THE EPISODE:
00:33 -- Introduction
00:44 -- The evolution of short sightedness
01:40 -- Tyrants
05:22 -- Energisers
08:39 -- Cynics
13:45 -- Short-term thinkers:  The enabling factor

You can download "Tyrants, Energisers and Cynics" or sign up to receive new Business Masterclass seminars automatically with iTunes or other podcast players.  (Click here for step-by-step instructions on how to subscribe).  My seminars are always available for download at no cost.

Good to Good

A lot of business advice, including my own, is often based on the assumption that people want to get somewhere. After all, the best-selling business book ever is "Good to Great", which replaced "In Search of Excellence" in the all-time sales league.

But here's an interesting question: what about people and firms that, quite consciously, make a choice that they don't want to pursue "Olympic Gold." They want to do good work, serve their clients well, while making a decent living.

Do business authors and consultants have anything to offer such people? Is there business advice out there for those without profit-maximising, glory-seeking objectives?

If not, is most business literature profoundly misleading, because it assumes objectives that many real people do not have?

Great Clients

One of the blogs I always read is Dennis Howlett's AccMan. He mostly focuses on the uses of technology in accounting, but every so often he throws in a gem of really valuable general wisdom.

Here's his list for how he characterises great clients:

All cards are played face up

• Mutual accountability
• Willing to share whatever is necessary to get the job done
• Constantly probing to find the best solution
• Time is no barrier
• Eager to learn ... and to teach
• An "always on" response mechanism
• Keep up the pace
• Express thanks
• Accept value based pricing

For me, I'd add:

• Wants thorough solutions, not quick fixes
• Is an admirable person of honour, integrity and principles, who it is a privilege to serve
• Wants a true dialogue, not just an agent to implement or advocate their pre-fixed conclusions
• Gives me enough pre-meeting homework so I can come to meetings prepared and give of my best
• instead of having to react on the fly
• Helps me understand and prepare in advance for organisational politics

What would you add as descriptors of great clients?

What Did You Learn from Drucker?

About a year ago, I participated in a webinar entitled "Best Selling Authors Pay tribute to Peter Drucker." Apart from myself, the 80-minute audio seminar (which you can still listen to here) featured:

• Tom Peters, business consultant and best-selling author of "In Search of Excellence" and many other titles
• Frances Hesselbein, founding president and chairman of the board of governors of the Leader to Leader Institute
• Marshall Goldsmith, Ph.D., consultant and best-selling editor of more than 20 business books, including "Coaching for Leadership"

In September of this year, the same group of people will be repeating our tribute, live and on a larger scale in Sydney, Australia. (To get details of the program, contact the Australian Institute of Management.)

In addition to a panel, we will each be making in-person presentations about how Peter Drucker influenced our work.

During the 2006 webinar, I said that, after the Bible and Shakespeare, Peter Drucker was the most quoted and least read author in history.

My question for all of you out there who have read his work is: what's the most important lesson YOU took away from Peter Drucker? How did he influence your approach to management and business?

Working With Your Client's People

Here's a reader question based on THE TRUSTED ADVISOR:

"A client retained me to help implement a re-branding strategy of their retail stores by coaching store managers in how to make the desired changes. One form of resistance I encountered was people saying words to the effect, 'We're doing fine right now' and 'We're already doing it,' which I interpreted as complacency. I was disappointed in the outcome of influencing those managers to change their approach. Most of them eventually left the company, voluntarily or otherwise. After re-reading your article, I'm wondering whether, had I 'named and claimed' their resistance, we may have enjoyed more success and retained their experience. Or perhaps they lacked the flexibility needed for a changing environment.

"I celebrated the small wins in making the changes that I saw their employees adopt -- usually despite the managers' indifference. I put most of my efforts toward asking the managers how I could help them remove the barriers they felt prevented them from embracing the new strategy. Neither of those approaches accomplished much and they usually told me they were too busy to give me and the new strategy their attention.

"After reading your article, I wonder what you think might have happened had I said to them words such as, "With so many satisfied customers and your positive financial results I guess it's hard to understand why the company is investing in this strategy. Please tell me if I'm out of line here, but I get the feeling that because you've been doing a good job that you don't share the company's concern about how quickly and how much the marketplace can change from shifts in customers' tastes and from new competition. Could you help me understand why I'm feeling that way?"

****

I hope other readers of this blog will join in, because this is a classic consulting situation. The core of the problem is that that you get hired by people at one level (top management) and are asked to work with their subordinates (in this case, the store managers.)

In such (completely normal) situations, it's not surprising that you are not treated as the subordinates' trusted advisor, because you are not. You are management's agent, and automatically treated (at least initially) with scepticism and suspicion.

What you were trying to get the store managers to do may indeed have been a wise move for the company, but you must not believe, for a moment, that, from that fact alone, the store managers would want to go along with it. You can't assume people will want to do the right thing for the company, even if (or especially even if) they hold middle management positions. Like all human beings, they will first filter any proposed changes through questions about what's good for them personally. They may never say it out loud, but that's what they are thinking -- always.

There's even an acronym for it: WIIFM? (What's in it for me?)

You describe the store managers' attitudes as "complacency" and "indifference" but I'll bet dollars to donuts that what was really going through their heads wasn't that neutral.

So, what's a trusted advisor to do? Well, obviously, one of the first things you have to figure out is whether or not the proposed changes your (top-level) client wants to make actually are in the personal best interests of the subordinates you are working with.

If the answer to that is "yes", then your counselling job is to earn the trust of the subordinates and work with them to help them see why the change is (potentially) good for them. (You had better not be faking it, either. If you really want me to buy into your program, you've got to convince me you're trying to help me as well as the company, not just the company.) I would try to get the individual talking about his or her job and what the changes would mean to them personally. I'd stop talking about "how much the marketplace can change from shifts in customers' tastes and from new competition."

If the answer is "no", the proposed changes are not in the subordinate's interests, then (as might be the case with the example you gave) maybe your job is to help the subordinate understand that, the change is going to come anyway, whether they like it or not, and you want to help them adapt to it. (It sounds like some the store managers could not, or did not.) Let's hope you can do it in a way that sounds like support, and not a threat!

Yes, this is all tough to do, but it's absolutely typical in consulting. Management always wants consultants to "go persuade my people to do X." That's what being a change agent is all about. And doing it well means being able to be an honest broker, understanding changes from the perspective of all the parties involved.

OK, folks. Time to pitch in. A lot of you who read this blog are consultants. How do you handle situations like this? What do you say?

Fat Smoker

One of the most interesting challenges in business is that very often we already know what we need to improve but we don't always get around to tackling it. The same is, of course, true in our personal lives and in this video, I will use that analogy to suggest ways that we can actually improve our business by drawing upon what it takes to improve our personal lives.

Edward Tufte on Powerpoint

Shawn Callahan, a regular participant on this blog, sent me a fabulous link to a discussion of Powerpoint's abysmal contribution to obfuscation, especially as it affected NASA's decision-making ability. The ensuing discussion is serious and heavy, but worth reading. Like me, Tufte is on a campaign to stamp out Powerpoint.

For those of you who don't know his work, Tufte is the world's expert on the visual display of quantitative information. His books are works of art. Look for them!

Handouts and Slides

For a long time, when I do a speech, seminar or consultation meeting, I have handed out many more pages of slides / handouts than I plan to cover.

The theory is that (a) if someone asks a question, I can say "Yes, l've got something on that, let's look at page 26" and (b) handing out more pages than I actually plan to cover gives people "takeaway" value -- extra material that they can review after the meeting.

In recent years, I've noticed something interesting -- this approach is becoming MORE effective. In the old days, when I handed out the paper copies to everyone, they rarely got used. With the best intentions in the world, people stuffed paper into their briefcase and never looked at it again. or they abandoned it so they don't have to carry it home.

Many meeting organisers responded to that by handing out CDs of the handout material, but even that is now old-hat. What's really working well is to post the slides and handout material on the web. Obvious, but incredibly effective.

I am now finding that people are REALLY following up and using the material, and apart from the "noble" cause of providing more value, it's helping to introduce my work to new people as those who met / heard me forward the material on to their friends.

I use two approaches at the moment. My standard set of handouts is on my website and I place the customised ones in a private area ("landing page") for each client. It might be interesting to note that I still hand out the paper copies. If there are none, and I just say "Go to the private landing page for more," fewer people go, because they don't know what's there and they don't bother. However, if I hand out the paper and say "If you see anything here that interests you, you can find it on the landing page," then the follow-up percentage is much higher.

I have two questions for you to react to, if you wish to join in:

(a) Who else has an interesting set of handouts available for download? Tom Peters posts his slides, but maybe we can make a list here, so that everyone who reads this blog can be made aware of other interesting resources out there. Any nominations?

(b) Has anyone evolved to different strategies on using and disseminating their slides / handouts? What are you doing?

Planners and Performers

This blogpost continues this week's series on making presentations. See here and here.

There's a spectrum of presentation styles, between planners and peformers.

I'm the latter.

Personally, I have difficulty sometimes working with and through human resource and training departments who, when we're working on putting together seminars or speeches, want to:

• Specify learning objectives
• Develop a teaching plan
• Identify in advance every slide that is going to be used, in which order
• Know which questions are going to be asked of the group at which point
• Otherwise establish a fixed methodology or flow for the session

I know these people are doing their job, and that many of them are highly trained in "adult learning." I also clearly see the need to capture the content, the process and the flow when a company or firm is trying to roll out a program which is going to be delivered many times in different locations.

I just find it hard to slot my delivery style into such a structured, planned approach.

I'm prepared to be accountable for achieving goals when making presentations: I just hate being locked in specifying in advance exactly what's going to be said, in what order. I never know that until the (interactive) performance begins.

I can also work with "planners" to help THEM develop programs that can be given (by others) multiple times.

But when the stage lights go up and the curtain rises, it's a performance! With all the strengths and uncertainties that are implied by that word.

By the way, this doesn't only apply to formal seminars. For me, it applies to all client meetings: I prepare, but I stop way short of preparing a fixed, formal presentation. Even there, I take the performing approach, rather than the (structured -- "who's going to say what when?") planned approach.

Does anyone have experience or insight as to how to capture the benefits of both approaches?

Take Questions In the First 15 minutes

As a follow up to yesterday's posting on using an overhead projector, here's another philosophy of mine on giving presentations (in small or large groups, standing up or sitting down.)

No matter how much you want to convey, you should always give your audience the chance to react and ask questions as soon as you have covered your first main point -- no later than 15 minutes into your talk.

You should ask something like "Does that fit your world?" "Do you all agree with that?" "Is that what you are doing now?"

By asking for immediate response, you can ensure that you are both relevant and that you are bringing your audience along in your chain of reasoning. If you wait until you have given 4 or 5 steps in your reasoning, you could suddenly get a question about your first point and have to retrace all your steps -- you'll be scrambling to catch up.

And if you get a question that's about something other than where you are going, either use it to bring you back to your theme, or ask permission to come back to it later.

Some speakers to do not follow the 15-minute rule, but I think that's what makes them "speakers" rather than EDUCATORS. If you want the focus to be on you -- give a speech. If you want to serve your audience -- take questions -- frequently and early.

The Overhead Projector

I have had some questions about why, in my videocasts, I am shown using an old-fashioned light-bulb overhead projector (OHP), even for presentations to large audiences. Some people ask whether it doesn't present an unprofessional, out-of-date image.

To this day, in all my presentations, I ask for the overhead projector as a matter of choice, because it is the best technology I know to minimise the barrier between me and the audience.

By writing on blank plastic sheets with the projector, I can create "lists" in front of people, drawing the answers out from them, even if I already know what I want the list to contain. The session thus becomes more Socratic and interactive.

Even if I am not being so interactive, and am making my own points, the act of writing them down in front of people lends some drama and "theatre" to the proceedings, allowing me to keep the presentation lively.

Contrast this with the all-too-common approach of having prepared slides, in a fixed order, and rigidly walking the audience through what you have decided they should listen to. That's no way to "connect."

A wise mentor once told me that, in making a presentation (or in teaching) you can focus on one of three things: your material (let's get through this), yourself (ain't I great?), or the audience (what do you want to ask about?)

Guess which is most valuable?

Which leads to the final virtue of the old-fashioned OHP: If someone in the audience asks "But what about this other perspective?", you can quickly throw on to the OHP any prepared slides you have on the topic. You don't need to scroll through tens (or hundreds) of computer based-Powerpoint slides to find the one you need.

An OHP and a collection of prepared plastic sheets allow you "random access" to your material, thereby enabling you to truly customise your remarks (and your performance) to the specific people in front of you.

Survey Results

In the year 2001, I did a study, which resulted in an article called "Practice What You Preach", in which I studied 139 professional businesses around the world. This video clip shows the early results of that study.

Doing It for the Money -- New strategy podcast episode available now

The eight episode of my new podcast series, Strategy and the Fat Smoker, is now live and available for download.

It is dedicated to exploring the themes found in my article by the same name.  I encourage you to forward these to friends and associates who may be interested in the topics covered.

"Doing it for the Money", the eighth episode in the series, talks about the basis for any successful marketing effort:  The ability of the provider to convince the buyer that they are truly interested in them and that they are genuinely trying to help.  This is no simple task and there are certainly no quick fixes for it.  How is it then, that this is so rarely a topic in any firms marketing discussions?  This episode looks into how firms can build firm-wide enthusiasm for involvement in business development.

NOTES FOR THE EPISODE:
00:39 -- Introduction
01:40 -- No quick fixes
06:34 -- What's wrong with "do it for the money"?
09:50 -- Promoting enthusiastic involvement in business development
14:02 -- Transactions vs. relationships in culture and rewards systems

You can download "Doing It for the Money" or sign up to receive new Business Masterclass seminars automatically with iTunes or other podcast players.  (Click here for step-by-step instructions on how to subscribe).  My seminars are always available for download at no cost.

Marketing the Marketing Consultants

There are now a HUGE number of consultants who advise professional firms out there, and probably the specialty with the largest number of practitioners is advising professional firms how to market themselves.

Which, of course, raises the question of how these marketing consultants go about marketing themselves.

As an author or blogger, I receive a large number of requests to endorse or review books being published by these marketing consultants, and it's very hard to be selective. Most of them are eminently sensible, but I have to confess that few make me sit up and say "Wow, I never thought of that!"

But then again, perhaps I'm not really the target audience for these books. Many of the authors are trying to serve people NEW to thinking about marketing, not observers, practitioners and consultants like me who, for better or for worse, have been trying to make sense of it for a long time.

So, I'm actually not in a position to evaluate how effectively these books serve their marketplace -- what may strike ME as simplistic and familiar may actually be a very useful way of presenting really useful ideas and suggestions. It's just that I'm too jaded to tell.

As a result, if I don't review your book or give you an endorsement, it may be a GOOD sign that you have written your manuscript well, for a completely different audience.

One of the problems of being around for a while is that an idea needs to be really new or counter-conventional to stand out, while the truth is that the need out there is not for new ideas, but for old wisdom communicated in better ways that can command attention in ways as the old ways lose their effectiveness due to familiarity (or from the simple fact of being old.)

But then, that's probably what all consultants have been doing from time immemorial.

Making The Network Work

Do you (or does your firm) belong to a network, where you try to collaborate with individuals and firms that are separate from your own?

Many individuals and firms attempt this, attempting to get the benefits of access to professionals in other locations (cities or countries) or in disciplines other than their own.

These networks exist in many professions, mostly to refer business to each other (or at least that's where I see them working best.) Occasionally, members of the network try to join up to pitch for business jointly, thereby (if they are successful) winning work they would not have qualified to bid for alone. This does happen, but much less often.

In some case, the benefit is not in revenue increases, but comes from belonging to a group that shares best practices. This can be the biggest benefit if you have mechanisms to facilitate the sharing.

My observation is that it's very hard to make these networks work very well. They are not disasters, and if the memebership fees are low enough, they can be "clubs" worth joining, but the potential is often unrealised.

Does anyone have views on the best ways to ensure that these networks really do benefit their members? If you are a member, what's the best way to take advantage of any network you belong to?

Thanks for another season of engaging and intelligent conversations

I am always delighted when we have ongoing conversations here in my blog. I'd like to express my gratitude by giving credit to everyone who has contributed these last few weeks with these sincere thank-yous for the month of March:

Commentors

Adam, Jason Alba, Alex, Al Arnold, Arnold, Aron, Brad Attig, Richard Becker, Nagesh Belludi, Louise Berto, Harry Binswangaer, Wally Bock, Pawel Brodzinski, Bob Brown, Duncan Bucknell, Shawn Callahan, Martin Calle, Stuart Cross, Lance Dunkin, Francis M. Egenias, Heidi Ehlers, Anna Farmery, Bruce Follansbee, Fran, Jordan Furlong, Phil Garcia, Brenda Glover, Marcel Goldstein, Phil Gott, Mark Gould, Ted Harro, Ken Hedberg, Dennis Howlett, Irene, John, Timothy Johnson, Linda Julian, Frank Kanu, Britt Keener, Tim Khaner, David Kirk, Delaney Kirk, Ed Kless, Greg Krauska, Nicolas Kübler, John Labbe, Roland Lichti, Toby Lucich, Stephanie Lunn, Stephanie Lunn, Javier Marti, Matthew E. Johnson, Ph.D., Matthew Stibbe (Bad Language), Patrick Mauldin, Andre (Redbeard) Mazerolle, Erik Mazzone, Darlene McDaniel, Pat McGraw, Jim McHugh, Bob McIlree, Chris McLaughlin, Michael, Karen Morath, Nancy, Pamela, Steve Pashley, Shelly Phegley, Ponnuchamy, Dave Prouhet, Nick Rice, Ric, Steve Roesler, Rebecca Ryan, Sammy, Bryan I. Schwartz, Sean, Stephen Seckler, Mark Shead, Shelley, Silver, Chas Simpson, Sonnie, Mike Spack, Will Swayne, Kathleen OBrien Thompson, Tom "Bald Dog" Varjan, Cindy Tonkin, Penelope Trunk, Vishal Tyagi, Peter Vajda, Ashutosh Wakankar, Ellen Weber, Susie Wee, Peter Weldon, Ric Willmot, Mary Wynne-wynter, Liz Zitzow

Trackbacks

A-Ideas Blog
Accountants Round Up
Balanced Life Center
Blawg Review
BrainBasedBusiness
Business Development
Business for enjoyment's sake
Client Service Insights (CSI)
Emmanuel Oluwatosin: Inspiring Excellence, Realisi
Internet Marketing Resource Center
Kishore Balakrishnan�s Blog
MabelandHarry
Michael's Thoughts
Modern Sage Online: Practical Living Blog
More than a living
Positive Politics
Recruiting.com
Research, Technology,
SalesMotivation.Net
Settle It Now Negotiation Blog
Small Firm and Solo Practice
Software Project Management
Sonnie's Porch
Target: Vietnam -- by Matt Powell
the basquette case
The Engaging Brand
The Greatest American Lawyer
The itzBig Blog
The Organic Leadership Blog
Thoughts & Philosophies
Three Star Leadership Blog
Verve Coaching
Victor-Fam.com

Podcast Trackbacks

Accountants Round Up
Emmanuel Oluwatosin: Inspiring Excellence, Realisi
Isabont
Law Dawg Blawg
TrackKnacks: Aptitude Wizard Watch
Verve Coaching
Victor-Fam.com

The Long Term

In much of my recent thinking (and writing) I have observed that our biggest barrier, as individuals and as organisations, is the difficulty in doing what is in our long-term best interest, not just what provides immediate gratification.

This problem comes up again and again. In last week's blogpost about How Not to Manage People, Mark D. observed: "My experience tells me that all things being equal most people want to or are at least willing to embrace your teachings but all things are not equal. As soon as your teachings conflict with short term financial gain, people begin to throw out the teachings which they view as costing them money. I know I am sceptical and somewhat jaded but there is no stomach for anything that risks immediate profits."

As I tried to point out, this is not about just MY teachings, but is a much broader point. As I argued in Strategy and the Fat Smoker, it is part of the human condition that we can know what to do, why we should do it, and even how to do things for which we fervently desire the benefits. None of that actually predicts that we actually are going to do what we absolutely know is good for us.

Note that it's not about a lack of incentives: live longer is a pretty good incentive!

I continue to be professionally frustrated by all of this. If we can't help people start doing what even they say would be best for them, how can we be really helpful?

So here's my question: how DO you help people actually get on the program for what is their best interests? The question is relevant if you are a manager trying to coach your subordinates, or if you a consultant or other trusted advisor trying to get a client on the path that is best for him or her.

So what actually works to get people to take the long-term view with their work, their business and their lives?

Rational discourse (logic) doesn't seem to work consistently well, and providing statistically reliable data doesn't seem to be persuasive (so much for the Surgeon General's reports!)

In descending order of effectiveness, here's my experience in what gets someone (us as well -- don't make this all about THEM) to change from acting in a short-term way to doing what they (already) know is best for them in the long-term:

• Talk up or create the "glamour" of the future state (Think of how fabulous it's going to be when you're there!)
• Make it a moral principal (Isn't it consistent with our/your values to act this way?)
• Get us/them to commit themselves to more public disclosure on actions, to keep them/us on track (embarrassment rather than guilt.)

What experiences do the rest of you have? Have you helped a short-term actor become a long-term actor? What REALLY helped/worked to bring about this transition? What gets people on "the diet?"

Strategy is Standards

Among the most important things I've learned is that to succeed, a professional firm needs values, principles, or standards. But you have to use these words very carefully. In many firms, their values are things they aspire to -- things they wish to be -- and that is not the sense in which I am using it here. I'm using the values in almost the religious sense, that these are the principles we will not be prepared to break. What I am trying to report to you is, firms that have such principles, flourish.

March 2007 Top 5 Roundup

I'd like to thank everyone for all the thoughtful comments on my blog. Here are the five posts that had the most discussion this month.

I REALLY hope that people will keep these specific conversations going: the spirit of a blog is that we all react to each other, and I am delighted when these conversations continue.

1. How to Set Fees
   It seems like a very bad idea to bill by the hour, especially if you are a consultant just beginning your practice. So how do you approach a client to establish accurate value-based pricing? A beginning consultant asks for advice on this crucial skill.


2. Required Reading
   Back to basics: a couple of my favorite entry-level business books and a host of suggestions from the readers.


3. Talking with Reporters
   Press coverage might be a nice pat on the back but is it worth pursuing as a marketing strategy? Here are my thoughts on this following a recent experience with the Wall Street Journal.


4. The Three-Month Rule
   Plans and reviews ought to be conducted on a once-every-three-month cycle -- it's long enough to work around the world's unpredictabilities both at work and in people's personal lives.


5. Promoting a New Article
   For some time now, I have been saying that a book is a "20th-century artifact" and that the way to serve your market (and to get your market's attention) is to write a stream of blog posts. The challenge I face -- and the topic on which I'd like your input -- is thinking about marketing the article I am writing based on these articles ...