A healthy self-image is essential for survival in the margin.
David Sandler, founder of the Sandler Sales Institute and creator of the Sandler Selling System, wrote and taught extensively on success in the selling business. One of the keys to success as a salesperson he identified in his book You Can't Teach a Kid to Ride a Bike at a Seminar: The Sandler Sales Institute's 7-Step System for Successful Selling is to maintain a healthy self-image or self concept.
Salespeople must constantly face rejection. Successful salesmen and women separate what they do from who they are. They realize their intrinsic worth isn't dependent on their performance. As a result, they are able to face the numerous failures and rejections salespeople must face daily without loss of steam.
Margin managers also confront a challenging work environment. Like salespeople, these leaders must develop a healthy self-image or identity to thrive in the margin.
Mr. Sandler recommends that people monitor their self perception (how you feel about yourself) and plan activities that will protect and reinforce your self-image on a daily basis. He recommends keeping a daily journal or log that tracks your performance/role "score" and your identify/self-image "score" along with a to-do list that includes both work assignments and self-image builders. Proactively addressing your inner health ensures the emotional stability needed for superior performance in the margin.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Essential Skills: Endurance
Margin leaders must have the internal fortitude to endure for long hull.
Life is the margin is rough. Margin leaders face a constant pressure to perform. They must delivery results quickly against long odds. Few individuals can sustain operations in this environment.
Looking back on my career, I can remember certain individuals who were in the margin, but moved out and others who refused to enter in the first place. When times get hard, I think how comfortable it would be to move into a position within the bounds of normal business operations. Those are times when I need a reminder of why I'm here and the results that can come from just showing up every day.
Below are some quotes on the theme of endurance.
Life is the margin is rough. Margin leaders face a constant pressure to perform. They must delivery results quickly against long odds. Few individuals can sustain operations in this environment.
Looking back on my career, I can remember certain individuals who were in the margin, but moved out and others who refused to enter in the first place. When times get hard, I think how comfortable it would be to move into a position within the bounds of normal business operations. Those are times when I need a reminder of why I'm here and the results that can come from just showing up every day.
Below are some quotes on the theme of endurance.
"Perseverance is the hard work you do after you get tired of doing the hard work you already did." - Newt Gingrich(from Quote Garden: http://www.quotegarden.com/)
"The greatest oak was once a little nut who held its ground." - Author Unknown
"Fall seven times, stand up eight." - Japanese Proverb
"One may go a long way after one is tired." - French Proverb
"Our greatest glory is not in never failing, but in rising up every time we fail." - Ralph Waldo Emerson
"Difficult things take a long time, impossible things a little longer." - André A. Jackson
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Essential Skills: Managing a Disaster
Margin leaders must sometimes deal with no-win situations.
Leaders in the margin are more likely to find themselves at the helm of a failed initiative than traditional managers. An initiative may have looked promising early on, but new information gathered along the way or initial results from activities may alter the assessment. While wise margin leaders can often avoid clearly hopeless causes, the high-risk environment guarantees that, occasionally, margin leaders must navigate through a flawed situation with as much grace as possible. Various strategies can be employed to deal with this situation, but the primary objective should be to move on to projects with higher chances of success as quickly as possible while maintaining the important relationships that hold margin efforts together.
Stick to it. In the face of a disaster, one tactic is to see it through whatever the cost - time, expense, effort, political capital, etc. This demonstrates that you have done everything in your power to make it work and may be the more politically acceptable means of dealing with a challenging situation. Organizations and partners tend to respect the individual who does everything he or she can to achieve a result against difficult odds. Any resulting failure can be attributed to external factors (e.g. "The market wasn't right."). However, this tactic can backfire if, after expending everything you have, it fails dramatically. Partners will question the leader's judgment and capabilities. This negative effect is compounded when the leader attempts new initiatives as partners will be significantly less willing to follow the leader into future initiatives having sunk their own resources into a failed activity.
Call it quits. Another approach is to tie off the effort. While all costs incurred up to that point are immediately lost with no hope of return on the investment, it avoids the continued expenditure of resources on a low/no-probability effort. This is easier to do early in the life of a project when expended resources are less than the projected expenditures to come. However, while some may respect the decision, other partners (particularly those who have already contributed significant resources) may strongly react and their involvement in future efforts may be curtailed. With this option, failure is more likely to be attributed to internal factors (e.g. "He just didn't have the ability to pull it off"). This tactic may also be seen as a leadership failure by those who always default to the "Stick to it" option. Calling it quits is easier to apply if the leader/initiative has other successes to point to, offers other opportunities in the future, and can explain the decision from within a larger context. In this situation, the outcome is more clearly the result of good decision-making skills than leadership failure.
Sidestep. In some instances, past efforts can be tied to future opportunities despite a current failure. Resources developed, contacts made, and lessons learned during the current, failed project will help the team pursue new opportunities in related fields. A margin leader can sometimes shift the team from one project to another that is related, recovering a portion of the resources invested to date in the failed project. The success of this tactic depends on how many of the committed resources can be transferred, the probability of success for the new project, and the cause of failure. Moving everyone from one failed project to another with equally-poor fundamentals merely postpones the disaster.
Applying any of the above tactics is easier when the leader has a proven track record of success to point to and an organizational culture that accepts risk and failure as a natural part of the business growth process. Lacking both, a margin leader has little choice but to apply the "Stick to it" approach.
Leaders in the margin are more likely to find themselves at the helm of a failed initiative than traditional managers. An initiative may have looked promising early on, but new information gathered along the way or initial results from activities may alter the assessment. While wise margin leaders can often avoid clearly hopeless causes, the high-risk environment guarantees that, occasionally, margin leaders must navigate through a flawed situation with as much grace as possible. Various strategies can be employed to deal with this situation, but the primary objective should be to move on to projects with higher chances of success as quickly as possible while maintaining the important relationships that hold margin efforts together.
Stick to it. In the face of a disaster, one tactic is to see it through whatever the cost - time, expense, effort, political capital, etc. This demonstrates that you have done everything in your power to make it work and may be the more politically acceptable means of dealing with a challenging situation. Organizations and partners tend to respect the individual who does everything he or she can to achieve a result against difficult odds. Any resulting failure can be attributed to external factors (e.g. "The market wasn't right."). However, this tactic can backfire if, after expending everything you have, it fails dramatically. Partners will question the leader's judgment and capabilities. This negative effect is compounded when the leader attempts new initiatives as partners will be significantly less willing to follow the leader into future initiatives having sunk their own resources into a failed activity.
Call it quits. Another approach is to tie off the effort. While all costs incurred up to that point are immediately lost with no hope of return on the investment, it avoids the continued expenditure of resources on a low/no-probability effort. This is easier to do early in the life of a project when expended resources are less than the projected expenditures to come. However, while some may respect the decision, other partners (particularly those who have already contributed significant resources) may strongly react and their involvement in future efforts may be curtailed. With this option, failure is more likely to be attributed to internal factors (e.g. "He just didn't have the ability to pull it off"). This tactic may also be seen as a leadership failure by those who always default to the "Stick to it" option. Calling it quits is easier to apply if the leader/initiative has other successes to point to, offers other opportunities in the future, and can explain the decision from within a larger context. In this situation, the outcome is more clearly the result of good decision-making skills than leadership failure.
Sidestep. In some instances, past efforts can be tied to future opportunities despite a current failure. Resources developed, contacts made, and lessons learned during the current, failed project will help the team pursue new opportunities in related fields. A margin leader can sometimes shift the team from one project to another that is related, recovering a portion of the resources invested to date in the failed project. The success of this tactic depends on how many of the committed resources can be transferred, the probability of success for the new project, and the cause of failure. Moving everyone from one failed project to another with equally-poor fundamentals merely postpones the disaster.
Applying any of the above tactics is easier when the leader has a proven track record of success to point to and an organizational culture that accepts risk and failure as a natural part of the business growth process. Lacking both, a margin leader has little choice but to apply the "Stick to it" approach.
Friday, August 13, 2010
Practicum: Performance Evaluation in the Margin
New performance measures need to be developed to evaluate the success of margin initiatives.
Applying traditional performance metrics to margin initiatives is a mistake in terms of corporate strategy. It undervalues the contributions of those working margin initiatives - the same personnel/initiatives that drive the creation of new corporate value. At the same time, it motivates margin leaders to pursue opportunities which may align better with established performance metrics but can only be undertaken at greater risk. These leaders will contribute less resources to the strategic wins which can build longer-term success to pursue higher-risk, short-term gains.
One way to deal with is this performance measurement challenge is to create a separate set of performance measures specifically designed for early-stage initiatives and programs. These metrics could emphasize market entry tactics such as contracts with new clients, business in new markets or industries, etc. Organizationally, the company would need to categorize initiatives by a "traditional or margin" classification to know which set of metrics should be applied.
Another approach is to diversify the common set of performance metrics used across the organization to allow multiple pathways to success. A small contract with a new client organization may be more valuable to the organization in the longer term than a larger contract with an established client. A refined set of performance metrics, for example, could assign greater per-dollar value to contracts with first-time clients. Alternatively, the organization could track the number of new client contracts obtained. By allowing multiple pathways to success and diversifying the metric set, organizations can encourage long-term strategic activities and margin initiatives without needing separate classifications.
Companies that incorporate performance measures friendly to margin initiatives can better align long-term strategy goals with corporate activities. Firms that say they want to diversify or move into new markets but continue to reward performance based on focused revenue-driven metrics fail to recognize that pioneering into new areas is different than maintaining an established program. Instead of achieving their goals, these firms create disincentives for activities which will lead to long-term growth.
Applying traditional performance metrics to margin initiatives is a mistake in terms of corporate strategy. It undervalues the contributions of those working margin initiatives - the same personnel/initiatives that drive the creation of new corporate value. At the same time, it motivates margin leaders to pursue opportunities which may align better with established performance metrics but can only be undertaken at greater risk. These leaders will contribute less resources to the strategic wins which can build longer-term success to pursue higher-risk, short-term gains.
One way to deal with is this performance measurement challenge is to create a separate set of performance measures specifically designed for early-stage initiatives and programs. These metrics could emphasize market entry tactics such as contracts with new clients, business in new markets or industries, etc. Organizationally, the company would need to categorize initiatives by a "traditional or margin" classification to know which set of metrics should be applied.
Another approach is to diversify the common set of performance metrics used across the organization to allow multiple pathways to success. A small contract with a new client organization may be more valuable to the organization in the longer term than a larger contract with an established client. A refined set of performance metrics, for example, could assign greater per-dollar value to contracts with first-time clients. Alternatively, the organization could track the number of new client contracts obtained. By allowing multiple pathways to success and diversifying the metric set, organizations can encourage long-term strategic activities and margin initiatives without needing separate classifications.
Companies that incorporate performance measures friendly to margin initiatives can better align long-term strategy goals with corporate activities. Firms that say they want to diversify or move into new markets but continue to reward performance based on focused revenue-driven metrics fail to recognize that pioneering into new areas is different than maintaining an established program. Instead of achieving their goals, these firms create disincentives for activities which will lead to long-term growth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)