We have numerous issues concerning communication at the management level as well as issues with employees being apateic.

The CEO, president of the company has a "hands-off" leadership style and it is creating numerous problems. In particular, we have a situation where the production manager is adept at identifying process improvements but is also a "hothead" who does not take kindly to those who disagree with his views or more generally those who have backgrounds different from him. He is frequently in conflict with other management staff, and also encourages his staff to do likewise. The CEO has received numerous complaints over the years but has yet to do anything about it. The CEOs attitude is "you have to take the good with the bad with people".

Managers in different positions have developed a self-serving attitude and they no longer working together to achieve goal congruence.

How to deal with these attitudes?

It is affecting the overall decision process as we no longer take advantage of opportunities that present themselves because of this internal conflict.


:(

Welcome to the Cove!

Just curious. Where do you fit in this ...?
:confused: :eek:

I was given a mandate on how to address the strategic and operational issues that this company currently faces to preserve and enhance its competitive position and profitabilty.

As I was in the process of gathering and evaluating information I was confronted with the previously mentioned issues. In order to complete my mandate I must address the internal issues first. If the key players and its employees are not working to achieve competitive position and profitabilty, any recommendations that I make will be useless. Don't you think?

Thank you.


I was given a mandate on how to address the strategic and operational issues that this company currently faces to preserve and enhance its competitive position and profitabilty.

As I was in the process of gathering and evaluating information I was confronted with the previously mentioned issues. In order to complete my mandate I must address the internal issues first. If the key players and its employees are not working to achieve competitive position and profitabilty, any recommendations that I make will be useless. Don't you think?

Originally posted by nobileros
I was given a mandate on how to address the strategic and operational issues that this company currently faces to preserve and enhance its competitive position and profitabilty.

If the key players and its employees are not working to achieve competitive position and profitabilty, any recommendations that I make will be useless. Don't you think?Like Atul, I was curious where you fall in all of this. You were given a mandate. From who? The hands-off CEO? "Take the good with the bad" Ceo? If that's the case, be prepared for an upstream swim towards the solutions to the problem(s). IMHO, you already identified the problem. Now, it's a case of telling it like it is. Not easy. Mandates start out as something very important. Once the bad news sinks in, your mandate becomes a nuisance to those who do not look inward for possible reasons that prompted them to issue a mandate in the first place. Welcome to the world of the Quality Professional. If I had a nickel for every mandate I was given in my working life that just disappeard like dust in the wind, I could retire in the Caymans next door to Cheech.
:ko: :smokin: :ko: :vfunny:

Hi nobileros,

Atul and Energy already asked the questions I had, so I'll skip that part. Your problem is a common one, and I've had it too. It's not always easy to resolve either... The question is what means you have at your disposal.It is affecting the overall decision process as we no longer take advantage of opportunities that present themselves because of this internal conflict. As this is the case you'll need to get a message through:
Better cooperation will encance the companys chances of survival
The company is issuing your paychecks
Do you need your paychecks?
This may be easier said than done, of course, and I do not suggest that you put it as plainly as I just did, but that's what they need to understand.

As for the CEO, he needs to put his foot down. From your description, it hardly seems as if he's the one actually running the company... Isn't that the root cause? The question is: How to get the message through without getting fried in the process. Tricky... You'll have to consider their personalities...

/Claes

nobileros
Well, I am not a management consultant! You will get better advice from some of the other members here. But it looks like the 'Hot heads' have to either cool or roll.

An interesting subject, not least because i feel that this situation is the rule rather than the exception. I have still yet to find a high-performing management team that are capable of working together as a team. Maybe i have just been unlucky.

I will throw at you a theoretical solution, and then explain my experience with the theorey.

Over the last 3 years i have one particular consulting contract that could loosely be described as a Company Development Project. At one particular point i defined the need for a new management team, advertised, interviewed and employed some very capble people.

I was able to predict that my next problem would be to get them working together as a team chasing the same goals, and the tool that i chose was a Balanced Scorecard.

Did it work? On balance.... no. Why not....? Here are my thoughts.

The company vision/mission was too unrealistic to be believed or impact sufficiently on anybodies daily work to make them sit up and take notice that it even exists. The Vision (New company direction) was not really accepted by key managers.

The company objectives were not really tied to the vision in any clear manner.

The dept objectives did not really match the company vision/objectives in any tangible way.
Dept objectives were frequently subjective wishes as opposed to objective measurable criteria.

The follow-up was not really consequent enough ie Only 5 meetings were held to discuss the progress during the whole year.

The CEO did not really emphasize the importance of following the objectives enough ie Realising the goals did not influence the managers yearly bonus.

And so on

Was it a complete waste of time?
Not exactly, some Dept Managers had enough pride to try and reach their objectives, these areas have improved, others just spoofed me to keep me quite. But overall i cannot say that it succeeded in making the Management Team work together.

However i am still not prepared to blame the tool, i think the problem lies in the application of the tool.

All the best

Interesting comment Jim

Can you take it further? What do you feel the consultant could or should have done in this situation.

Regards

Well Jim, you may, or you maynot have already understood that I AM the consultant. Nevertheless, ill not get too defensive, which is why i asked for suggestions how to improve the approach.

Not every day is a christmas, but everyday is a school day.

The results were not particularly good, so 'couldnt the management team have acheived this without the consultant'.... was your question. The answer to this explains why, in reality consultants are very often used, rightly or wrongly.

Most of the particpants had had some sort of previous exposure to either MBO or Balanced Scorecards, but alone they would not have proposed this approach, alone they would not have made the effort to put together a structure and alone they would not have the discipline to sit together the 5 times that they did.

Ill attempt a parallel here. We all know that we are more healthy and live longer if we dont overeat/drink and make sure that we exercise regularly. However the majority of us need some sort of external influence to give us the self-discipline to do it. Ie pressure from a spouse/friend/relation or an external event (heart attack for example).

In reality i find it extremely rare that a consultant offers any specialist knowledge that nobody inside the company has. Rather the consultant is used (rightly or wrongly) as a resource to;
A. Provide an external perspective.
B. Provide the push/energy to implement something that full-time mangers simply dont have.
C. Create the image that 'because we are paying this consutlant so much money he must be right'.
D. Implement something from a neutral stand-point without being burdened by the inevitable intercompany rivalry and time-worn paradigms.

Does that sound like BS?.

Regards

Great post, Andy.

You have described our situation to a tee. Unfortunately for us, our Consultant comes in for a day every 5 to 6 weeks. This will go on until we achieved certification. Unless, he walks. The homework assignments are structured so that we hit all sections of the standard in the course of a year. Problem? The homework I’m assigned gets done. Very little input by others. We average about 7/8 assignments per session. The list of assignments that are still outstanding number 22. We’re going backwards. The Consultant sees it. He politely reminds everybody these things are important and they have to get done if we are to follow our Milestone Plan. For that whole day, everybody is on the same page. Each one demonstrating their profound knowledge of the Standard and, generally blowing smoke. When the Consultant leaves, back to business as usual. CEO pep talks, Steering Committee promises to seriously attack the growing list of assignments and Training Presentations with accent on employee involvement, doesn’t mean a thing. It will take a strong, disciplined Top Manager who knows it will not happen until everybody pitches in, to take the reins on our ISO effort. As we have a new company president coming here in about three weeks, maybe I’ll get lucky. As my boss, he must know the status of our ISO effort. Right? He will hear what I posted here and a lot more. I have my fingers crossed. A Consultant, I feel, is powerless in some cases to get non-believers to believe. Ours finally got paid and now just gets expenses to come here. I get the feeling that he would rather be somewhere else and can’t say that I blame him.:rolleyes: :ko: :smokin:

It will take a strong, disciplined Top Manager who knows it will not happen until everybody pitches in, to take the reins on our ISO effort. As we have a new company president coming here in about three weeks, maybe I’ll get lucky. Here's hoping you'll get lucky Energy. The current situation sounds really frustrating...

/Claes

Originally posted by Claes Gefvenberg
Here's hoping you'll get lucky Energy. The current situation sounds really frustrating...

/Claes

Thanks Claes,

It's always been like that for me. Management that practice Lip service, deceipt and only doing what you have to do. Hey, not me!:biglaugh: You can say, well you're part of the problem if you aren't the answer. True. But, that's how I have stayed gainfully employed. Unfortunately, it's a little late in my career for another move. And, the few moves I have made, it's the same old thing. We just have to keep banging away, hoping for the best.
:ko: :smokin:

Companies choose consultants based on what they think they want, when in reality the consultant that sometimes gets hired is not what they need (not a match)......then they end up with someone that would rather be somewhere else and is not effective. I still say (for the nth time!!) hiring a consultant is like a marriage......do you want to listen to this person nag at you? Or will this person not be a nagger? Do we need a nagger or someone that pops in and says "ok guys this is what i need you to do....." and go then away for 5 weeks and you loose 5 weeks if everyone doesn't finish their assignments????????

Methodology and personalities play such an important part in this communication loop..........this consultant/company relationship. Every sales call gets this same lecture....I typically get the deer in the headlights response until I elaborate. Then I really confuse them.........probably would get more work if i didn't BUT i don't want to be a drop in every 5 weeks type of consultant, unless i am confident that its the right method for that company......to me its a waste of my time and their money reflecting on my job performance.

that said...Andy, communicate with them both, be the conduit. An external expert (even one with less knowledge than an internal one!!!) will always command more respect.....as does a person with a foreign accent. when I travel to the UK to train auditors, my accent gains me instant credibality, and visa-versa my colleagues who travel here...when in fact we are quite equal.

My experience has been that the consultant, whatever their expertise, is used as a crutch and as an excuse for failure. I'm not bashing cosultants, I've never seen them utilized properly. Nor have I experienced a management team working totaly together towards a common goal since I left the Navy. They have all seemed to do the hit and miss stuff - flavor of the month. I have tried to tie everything to our operating profit margin, not only do you peak an interest from the bean counters but the upper management guys understand the impact.
Andy, what you list as consultants being used for is right on IMO.
A. Provide an external perspective.
1) But no one from outside can tell me how to operate my business/department, etc.
B. Provide the push/energy to implement something that full-time mangers simply dont have.
1) Once you're gone the push/energy goes with you "glad that's over"
C. Create the image that 'because we are paying this consutlant so much money he must be right'.
1) Which causes a problem in itself - I could have done this, why don't they pay me?
D. Implement something from a neutral stand-point without being burdened by the inevitable intercompany rivalry and time-worn paradigms
1) He doesn't understand what I'm up against he's doesn't have to deal with it.

IMHO 'Company Development Project' is a bit vague description.

What were the agreed deliverables and what were the measurables? What KPIs were considered?How was improvement demonstrated? Was there a consensus about methods of measurement? Was the project planned and tracked against a timeline (Gantt chart)? Were positive and negative stakeholders identified? How were bottlenecks identified? Who was responsible for motivating the employees (not just the managers)?

Balanced Scorecard can be a very good tool if used properly. The single most important factor for its success is absolute commitment from the top management. Short term tactics and long term strategies have to be properly communicated to all concerned. I believe an external consultant can play a key role here, suggesting the right approaches appropriate for the size of the company.

I will quote from the Executive Summary of an article Arthur Schneiderman - 'Why Balanced Scorecards Fail' ( complete article is available on Schneiderman.com)

-The Balanced Scorecard concept has intrinsic executive appeal.
-To be successful the Balanced Score-card must be viewed as the tip of the improvement iceberg.
-Less visible, but equally essential, are processes to assure that the scorecard contains the
right things and that support systems are in place to maximize the chances of them being done
right.
-External factors or impatience may overpower the long-term positive financial consequences of
significant non-financial improvements.
-Tenacity and faith may be the most important CEO attributes for successful Balanced Scorecard
implementation.

Just my 2c.

-Atul.